19 April 2016

Capital Metro endorsed by Cabinet - light rail is a go!

| Damien Haas
Join the conversation
141

I was in the room for the Capital Metro Industry Briefing at the National Convention Centre this morning when Simon Corbell, Capital Metro Agency Minister, announced that the business case for Capital Metro had been endorsed by Cabinet, and the project approved.

Total cost – 783 million dollars.

Construction will begin in 2016 with service expected to begin in 2019/20.

EOI’s will be called for on 31 October, when the full business case will also be released.

This is such wonderful news for the future of Canberra.

A full report is at ACT Light Rails website.

http://www.actlightrail.info/2014/09/act-government-endorse-capital-metro.html

Damien Haas
Chair, ACT Light Rail

Join the conversation

141
All Comments
  • All Comments
  • Website Comments
LatestOldest

miz said :

I understand perfectly the difference between fed and local. I am not an eejit.
Nor will I ever forget the closure of schools under either the Libs or Labor. Both were unbelievably short sighted and devastating. In particular, the Lib closures decimated Weston Creek for years (sealing its fate as a place for older persons as there are now fewer schools for growing families looking for a suburb to move into). My own children’s school was under threat by the Labor closures and their incorrect statistics.
I am highly cynical of both sides of ACT politics, given that they both essentially do what they like, pretend to consult, and are beholden to developers instead of ratepayers. It is disgusting and contemptuous of the electorate.
However, you have to understand, Kate Carnell’s government cast a long shadow. She created a user pays nightmare for many people, including me (I was a sole parent in those days – it was a very difficult period and a time I will never forget – my children and I bear significant mental and emotional scars from the Howard/Carnell years, which were horrible, just horrible). This article is a good summary of what people are concerned about.
http://www.crikey.com.au/2002/09/09/the-rare-highs-and-many-lows-of-kate-carnell/
For good or for ill, despite this local crowd clearly having all the hallmarks of being in too long, Labor are generally perceived a being ‘for the people’ whereas Liberal is perceived as being ‘for business’ (i.e. privileging money over the public good – you know, the now-discredited ‘trickle down’ theory which justifies propping up business and not helping anyone else). This is why Labor do not do great when they try to be claytons Liberals.
All I am suggesting is that the local Liberals make it clear they are more interested in being fair to the ACT people and maintaining the public good, rather than being simply about money and private interests. For instance, the light rail proposal is daft on many levels, not simply economics – it is also about being a good steward of what we already have (buses and good roads), being honest and realistic about our capabilities (we are a small town, we are not Sydney/Melbourne, we have low density), and being even handed to all Canberrans (not just a pork barrelling exercise for a small, rather wealthy part of Canberra).
It’s obvious really – if the local Libs were able to make a stand for the public good convincingly, they would garner support from those Canberrans who are willing to be persuaded but have residual concerns about the excesses of Liberal-style (really USA style free market) economics, as evidenced by the feds. Unfortunately for the local LIbs, the feds are proving themselves not only to be terrible for Australia but they are hurting Canberra as if were personal. Remember, Canberrans work for them, and know exactly what they are like. Therefore, the locals should try to distinguish themselves. I am simply giving them a recipe. I have been right about these things before (not that anyone ever listens, but that’s their problem, not mine). It is likely that the business /developer backers they want to woo (for funds) will not be happy with such an approach. I say to that, do they want to be in government, or not?

The story that Crikey relates appears factual but they go overboard on hate.
Carnell has done nothing that her Labor successors haven’t also done. There are several joint ventures between the current Labor/Green minority government and land development companies. The association with developers is putrid as revealed by the Canberra Times yesterday. Labor are more involved with “business” than the Liberals have ever been. Read the article.
Regarding Carnell’s road accident, while she had been drinking there were no charges ensuing.
At least two Labor politicians living in Canberra have been charged with drink driving offences in the past 30 years.
ACT Labor leaders have also ventured into personal, pet projects similar to ones that Carnell initiated and her efforts to get the Bruce Stadium functional for the Sydney Olympic games on the “build it and they will come” principle was probably the worst in terms of wasted money followed closely by the futsal slab which has at least proved multifunctional as a circus stage and a car park.
Of course, the $23 million that Andrew Barr has committed to sponsoring a football team in Sydney is just as crazy but Crikey haven’t written about that, have they?.
We should not forget that Carnell was single-handedly tenacious in getting Federal funding for the duplication of the Federal Highway into Canberra which was a massive achievement that we all now take for granted.
What progress has Labor made in duplicating the Barton Highway in the past 12 years?
Regarding the light rail, of all the opinions put forward so far, Carnell’s was by far the most informed and clearly the best by someone with no vested interest.
I wasn’t aware that she introduced “user pays” to the ACT that specifically punished you and your family but the same principles have been carried on by Labor and I doubt whether any of the current “user pays” services would benefit you to the detriment of others.
I was hoping you would have more information on how ACTEW could be made into a cooperative but I am now seeing it was just another socialist thought bubble.

I understand perfectly the difference between fed and local. I am not an eejit.
Nor will I ever forget the closure of schools under either the Libs or Labor. Both were unbelievably short sighted and devastating. In particular, the Lib closures decimated Weston Creek for years (sealing its fate as a place for older persons as there are now fewer schools for growing families looking for a suburb to move into). My own children’s school was under threat by the Labor closures and their incorrect statistics.
I am highly cynical of both sides of ACT politics, given that they both essentially do what they like, pretend to consult, and are beholden to developers instead of ratepayers. It is disgusting and contemptuous of the electorate.
However, you have to understand, Kate Carnell’s government cast a long shadow. She created a user pays nightmare for many people, including me (I was a sole parent in those days – it was a very difficult period and a time I will never forget – my children and I bear significant mental and emotional scars from the Howard/Carnell years, which were horrible, just horrible). This article is a good summary of what people are concerned about.
http://www.crikey.com.au/2002/09/09/the-rare-highs-and-many-lows-of-kate-carnell/
For good or for ill, despite this local crowd clearly having all the hallmarks of being in too long, Labor are generally perceived a being ‘for the people’ whereas Liberal is perceived as being ‘for business’ (i.e. privileging money over the public good – you know, the now-discredited ‘trickle down’ theory which justifies propping up business and not helping anyone else). This is why Labor do not do great when they try to be claytons Liberals.
All I am suggesting is that the local Liberals make it clear they are more interested in being fair to the ACT people and maintaining the public good, rather than being simply about money and private interests. For instance, the light rail proposal is daft on many levels, not simply economics – it is also about being a good steward of what we already have (buses and good roads), being honest and realistic about our capabilities (we are a small town, we are not Sydney/Melbourne, we have low density), and being even handed to all Canberrans (not just a pork barrelling exercise for a small, rather wealthy part of Canberra).
It’s obvious really – if the local Libs were able to make a stand for the public good convincingly, they would garner support from those Canberrans who are willing to be persuaded but have residual concerns about the excesses of Liberal-style (really USA style free market) economics, as evidenced by the feds. Unfortunately for the local LIbs, the feds are proving themselves not only to be terrible for Australia but they are hurting Canberra as if were personal. Remember, Canberrans work for them, and know exactly what they are like. Therefore, the locals should try to distinguish themselves. I am simply giving them a recipe. I have been right about these things before (not that anyone ever listens, but that’s their problem, not mine). It is likely that the business /developer backers they want to woo (for funds) will not be happy with such an approach. I say to that, do they want to be in government, or not?

miz said :

Dungfungus, i’s all about WHAT you flog off – and unfortunately for the Liberals, they did sell a lot of important stuff off, closed schools, etc etc, when they were last in government and Canberrans are generally politically savvy and have long memories.
It’s about perception control. Yes I agree, local Labor/Green has also been similarly stupid about, (for instance) closing schools they now need, poor development proposals/decisions such as light rail etc, which is why it is clear they have been in too long and it’s time for a change. However, the feds do not help the local Liberals’ cause, so some assurance would go a long way to securing additional votes that would tip it enough to secure a definitive result. I am one of these people.
re ACTTAB – I couldn’t care less about that sell off as the government should not be involved in gambling at all in my view, so good riddance. However, essential services and utilities eg water, health services, schools are ‘public good’ operations which should be kept in public hands to maintain them as ongoing investments (not always quantified by $$, BTW). This is why, in the federal sphere, it is a big mistake to run down Medicare, sell Medibank Private, to have sold Telstra, etc. The economic tide has turned on the privatisation concept big time.
Regarding ACTEW, it already belongs to us, the ACT people. I personally believe that it should actually operate more like a cooperative, not a profit making concern. It undoubtedly could do with some seriously better management, but I note that most of our unease about it stems from its ‘corporate’ behaviour such as inappropriate corporate bonuses. However, it does not automatically follow that ACTEW should be sold off. IMO governments should, for security reasons, remain in complete control of major public assets such as utilities, and it is incredibly ‘short term’ to sell assets off for a bottom line problem.

You are mixing Territory and Federal “sell-offs”. Let’s just deal with the ACT.
It’s been so long since the Liberals were in power in the ACT I have honestly forgotten what they sold off and how many schools the closed even though I think I am politically savvy and have a long memory.
Would you please refresh my memory accordingly, with examples, links etc?.
I have never considered that ACTEW could function as a cooperative and there may be regulations preventing this. I can’t see it working but I am open to hearing other opinions.

Dungfungus, i’s all about WHAT you flog off – and unfortunately for the Liberals, they did sell a lot of important stuff off, closed schools, etc etc, when they were last in government and Canberrans are generally politically savvy and have long memories.
It’s about perception control. Yes I agree, local Labor/Green has also been similarly stupid about, (for instance) closing schools they now need, poor development proposals/decisions such as light rail etc, which is why it is clear they have been in too long and it’s time for a change. However, the feds do not help the local Liberals’ cause, so some assurance would go a long way to securing additional votes that would tip it enough to secure a definitive result. I am one of these people.
re ACTTAB – I couldn’t care less about that sell off as the government should not be involved in gambling at all in my view, so good riddance. However, essential services and utilities eg water, health services, schools are ‘public good’ operations which should be kept in public hands to maintain them as ongoing investments (not always quantified by $$, BTW). This is why, in the federal sphere, it is a big mistake to run down Medicare, sell Medibank Private, to have sold Telstra, etc. The economic tide has turned on the privatisation concept big time.
Regarding ACTEW, it already belongs to us, the ACT people. I personally believe that it should actually operate more like a cooperative, not a profit making concern. It undoubtedly could do with some seriously better management, but I note that most of our unease about it stems from its ‘corporate’ behaviour such as inappropriate corporate bonuses. However, it does not automatically follow that ACTEW should be sold off. IMO governments should, for security reasons, remain in complete control of major public assets such as utilities, and it is incredibly ‘short term’ to sell assets off for a bottom line problem.

mcs said :

dungfungus said :

miz said :

IMO the ACT Libs will be a shoe-in if, in addition to getting rid of light rail, they promise not to go on a privatisation/sell off blitz of things that belong to the people (this is what people detest about the Libs – they give the distinct impression they are more interested in money and business than people and society).

Err, the last sell off a public asset was ACTAB, last month.
I think that was the decision of the ACT Labor minority government so don’t automatically accuse the libs who are more interested in value for money and fostering business which will benefit people and society more than creation of phony public service jobs and asbestos compensation handouts.
The only thing the Canberra Liberals have spoken about selling off is Actew. If it were done 15 years ago under the Carnell government it would have saved the Territory hundreds of millions of dollars.

Surely dungfungus you can see that, no matter who is in power, there is little reasonable reason for ACTTAB to be government owned. Should have been sold a long time ago.

And how would selling off ACTEW have saved the Territory hundreds of millions of dollars? We will get rorted by ACTEW/ACTEWAGL/Whatever version of it you want, whether its government owned or privatised, as in the end they are essential services being provided which are regulated to some degree, under a regulatory system that is pretty much busted.

I agree ACTAB should have been sold long ago but which party has been in power for the last 14 years? I mean, how long do Labor need and how many frauds did they need to decide to flog it?
And if ACTEW was sold 15 years ago we would have saved at least $60 million on the Transact debacle, probably about the same on the Better Place disaster so there is over $100 million to start with. Then there are the hugely inflated executive salaries that would be eliminated etc.
I don’t suggest that ACTEW should be privatised either – it should be sold to an existing national energy supplier like Origin who are already offering up to 14% discounts on electricty and 8% of gas.

dungfungus said :

miz said :

IMO the ACT Libs will be a shoe-in if, in addition to getting rid of light rail, they promise not to go on a privatisation/sell off blitz of things that belong to the people (this is what people detest about the Libs – they give the distinct impression they are more interested in money and business than people and society).

Err, the last sell off a public asset was ACTAB, last month.
I think that was the decision of the ACT Labor minority government so don’t automatically accuse the libs who are more interested in value for money and fostering business which will benefit people and society more than creation of phony public service jobs and asbestos compensation handouts.
The only thing the Canberra Liberals have spoken about selling off is Actew. If it were done 15 years ago under the Carnell government it would have saved the Territory hundreds of millions of dollars.

Surely dungfungus you can see that, no matter who is in power, there is little reasonable reason for ACTTAB to be government owned. Should have been sold a long time ago.

And how would selling off ACTEW have saved the Territory hundreds of millions of dollars? We will get rorted by ACTEW/ACTEWAGL/Whatever version of it you want, whether its government owned or privatised, as in the end they are essential services being provided which are regulated to some degree, under a regulatory system that is pretty much busted.

miz said :

IMO the ACT Libs will be a shoe-in if, in addition to getting rid of light rail, they promise not to go on a privatisation/sell off blitz of things that belong to the people (this is what people detest about the Libs – they give the distinct impression they are more interested in money and business than people and society).

Err, the last sell off a public asset was ACTAB, last month.
I think that was the decision of the ACT Labor minority government so don’t automatically accuse the libs who are more interested in value for money and fostering business which will benefit people and society more than creation of phony public service jobs and asbestos compensation handouts.
The only thing the Canberra Liberals have spoken about selling off is Actew. If it were done 15 years ago under the Carnell government it would have saved the Territory hundreds of millions of dollars.

IMO the ACT Libs will be a shoe-in if, in addition to getting rid of light rail, they promise not to go on a privatisation/sell off blitz of things that belong to the people (this is what people detest about the Libs – they give the distinct impression they are more interested in money and business than people and society).

I fully support ACT light rail. Only trouble is they should not have started to triple the rates until they built it.
Don’t worry if you feel you are being forced out of your car. You will always be able to pay a fee for it being stored while it is not in use.
However, I have no confidence from what I have so far that this mob could deliver a sensible light rail system.

farnarkler said :

So Jeremy Hanson has come out and said he will do everything to stop light rail. Problem is, and this was not mentioned in the CT article, Labor has already spent X millions of $ with consultants, etc. Is Jeremy just going to accept that loss or will he claw back those millions already spent through some other way?

Not that I have any faith in the ACT Liberals either, btw. But, I suppose if the Business Case is in fact “positive” in economic terms, then unless that Business Case is fatally flawed, why would they stop it ?

If contracts are signed before the next election, then it is very highly unlikely it can or will be stopped anyway.

If it were stopped, then the $ spent up to that point would be regarded in economic terms as a “sunk cost” ie. written off. Maybe better that than ongoing subsidisation by ACT Ratepayers year after year after year, I suppose. A better course of action would be to shelve it until the ACTs economic and fiscal situation improves. That way, the sunk costs won’t appear as wasted taxpayer money.

So Jeremy Hanson has come out and said he will do everything to stop light rail. Problem is, and this was not mentioned in the CT article, Labor has already spent X millions of $ with consultants, etc. Is Jeremy just going to accept that loss or will he claw back those millions already spent through some other way?

house_husband said :

Antagonist said :

farnarkler said :

Can anyone explain why we need light rail?

In short, it is to fill an election promise that Labor and Mayor Rattenbury stole from another minor party to secure the votes they needed to form a minority government.

Bingo. And this is why the whole light rail situation is a farce.

It was never an option that came out of a comprehensive assessment of our public transport options. It is one of several ideas being thrown around the Greens got all excited about in the absence of any serious costings. They then saw a chance to force it on to us by appealing to a politician’s most basest of instincts, the desire to be in power.

What we will now get is a business case that is made to fit the outcome so that Labor can build their train set, appease the Greens and hold onto power.

Correct re the Business Case. Rattenburry was on 2CC late this afternoon saying that the Business Case is indeed “positive”. Like, what a surprise !

I can hear the sound of furious tapping on Government keyboards by Canberra Metro staff and Gov’t spin doctors to make it so………

HiddenDragon5:53 pm 20 Oct 14

These guys are on the case, in a refreshingly rational way:

http://www.macrobusiness.com.au/2014/10/light-rail-divides-the-nations-capital/

This very insightful comment (not, I repeat, not made by me under a different blogonym) is worth repeating in full:

“Road investments do not concentrate economic rent like rail ones. This is because the total potential number of trip origins and destinations that benefit from a road investment is exponentially higher than that for a rail route.
This fetish for rails would not exist if it was not for the rentier-gouge opportunities. There will be a certain amount of ideological support that on its own would not be sufficient.
“Progressives love railroads and hate cars, and that is not without a political dimension. Railroads tell you where to go, which is very appealing if you see society as one big factory to be subjected to (your) expert management. And that’s really the basic question of liberalism in the better, classical sense of the word: Is the state here to tell you where to go, or is it here to help you get where you are going? And how to get there?”
— Kevin D. Williamson, “Planes, Trains, and the Internet,” National Review Online, July 15, 2014
http://www.nationalreview.com/article/382732/planes-trains-and-internet-kevin-d-williamson

To all that has hitherto been said against the trams, the Government’s response to recent reports of dim prospects for the ACT economy illustrates the mentality at work – “something” needs to be done – this is “something” – let’s do it!

will the trains service life end before the network is paid off ?

house_husband12:43 pm 20 Oct 14

Antagonist said :

farnarkler said :

Can anyone explain why we need light rail?

In short, it is to fill an election promise that Labor and Mayor Rattenbury stole from another minor party to secure the votes they needed to form a minority government.

Bingo. And this is why the whole light rail situation is a farce.

It was never an option that came out of a comprehensive assessment of our public transport options. It is one of several ideas being thrown around the Greens got all excited about in the absence of any serious costings. They then saw a chance to force it on to us by appealing to a politician’s most basest of instincts, the desire to be in power.

What we will now get is a business case that is made to fit the outcome so that Labor can build their train set, appease the Greens and hold onto power.

farnarkler said :

Can anyone explain why we need light rail? ACTION, whilst not perfect, gets people from Gungahlin to Civic and our traffic jams are tiny compared with other cities. Is this just an ego massage for Labor?

There is this “warm feeling” that the eco-nuts get when they see a tram namely it generates no visible pollution. The dirty coal fire powered stations that supply the electricity are “over the hills and far away”.
They are also very trendy and have “chic-Euro” styling which appeals to the Australian cringe.
Apart from that there is the “me too” mentality.
Oh, and they are “visionary” even though they are a 100 year old technology (go figure that one).
That’s about it (for the moment).

farnarkler said :

Can anyone explain why we need light rail?

In short, it is to fill an election promise that Labor and Mayor Rattenbury stole from another minor party to secure the votes they needed to form a minority government.

farnarkler said :

Can anyone explain why we need light rail? ACTION, whilst not perfect, gets people from Gungahlin to Civic and our traffic jams are tiny compared with other cities. Is this just an ego massage for Labor?

This has been raised time and time again – correctly.

What concerns me most are comments pro the tram, like “just to it” or “lets get this thing happening” or “build it and they wil come” (meaning passengers and/or population density along the tram line) or “this will show that Canberra is all grown up now”, etc.

To me, against the weight of evidence that shows a tram is not financially viable, those “pro” comments defy logic, common sense and fiscal responsibility.

There is talk about returning the education system to focus on the basics. I hope that includes basic math, logic and common sense. Start with re educating Gallagher, Barr, Rattenburry, Corbell, etc + all the pro light rail brigade who really are yet to put up more evidence in support of their views – other than sloganism. Residents, ratepayers and voters in the ACT deserve better than this garbage decision making.

That Benefits Cost Ratio/business case to be released this month by the ACT Gov’t is going to be quite an interesdting read. I can not wait to see the amount of fudging, assumptions and docturing it will take to make it better than 1:1.

Can anyone explain why we need light rail? ACTION, whilst not perfect, gets people from Gungahlin to Civic and our traffic jams are tiny compared with other cities. Is this just an ego massage for Labor?

This is just idiotic.

The rapid bus transit system, according to their own studies, will do essentially the same job for a little over half the cost. (Yes, light rail defenders, I realise that it will be something like 3% slower and 2% less capacity or something to that effect, but it will cost a hell of a lot less and will be in place much faster).

All of the estimates for light rail show that it will, in all but the most optimistic scenarios, lose money. lots of money.

This is no good for anyone. People who live on the Red Rapid express corridor will have their current bus service stripped away and be forced to pay double or more their current fares to take the train (on top of double dipping on higher rates (higher land valuations plus a special levy on those who live within a few hundred metres of the track).

Oh, and the train stops will be a lot further apart than the bus stops, so an add’l 500m walk won’t be all that unusual. Fine if you’re young and healthy, but if you’re older or are not very mobile, that’s a big deal.

Finally the “public consultation” on this project has been an insult to every Canberrans’ intelligence. At no point were they ever genuinely interested in hearing or responding to our views. This was a done deal from the beginning, and the estimates their own reports or the strong opposition of residents (I’m a gungahliner on the corridor and I oppose it!) have been blatantly and callously disregarded.

best we can hope for is a change of gov’t before they start tearing up the roads. 4 years of insane traffic between gungahlin to civic while they build this white elephant… there’s something to look forward to.

dkNigs said :

Finally, lets get this happening. The town centres need solid connection like this, Canberra was designed for light rail, and this will help densification of the town centres. When do the nimbi’s think we should do this? In 10-20 years time when we already needed it and it’ll cost twice as much money? Like the NBN?

Hearing the bleating of “monorail” from the Tuggeranong faithful, but weren’t the Tuggeranong community council calling for the ACT govt to buy them the 30kmph decommissioned monorail from Sydney? It has to start somewhere, and it’ll definitely hit Gungahlin, Belconnen and Woden before Tuggeranong.

+1

This opinion from Ottawa (a capital city in Canada with a population of about one million) is perhaps a taste of what we will get in the future if the current Canberra light rail goes ahead.
What a pity Ministers Corbell and Rattenbury didn’t use this as a case study – there are so many parallels. It’s not too late to bail out yet either.
http://ottawacitizen.com/news/local-news/half-a-light-rail-system

Light rail in Sydney has its problems with customer satisfaction.
http://www.theage.com.au/nsw/sydney-public-transport-fewer-complaints-20141015-116cdp.html

pajs said :

dungfungus said :

gooterz said :

dungfungus said :

rosscoact said :

dungfungus said :

rosscoact said :

Sandman said :

Why are elected public figures given authority to spend these amounts of money?

Because when the population of the ACT was asked before the election if they would elect a government that would deliver light rail you said yes and elected them. You gave them that authority.

Nice spin there.
What Katy Gallagher actually said, 2 years ago tomorrow was:
“If re-elected in 2012, ACT Labor will establish the ACT’s first large-scale private sector partnership to plan, finance and develop the first stage of a Light Rail Network for Canberra – the Capital Metro”.
Were were not “asked” we were told and ACT Labor did not get re-elected, they were able to form a minority government with the only Green candidate that was elected who happened to be campaigning for a light rail as well.
In saying that “you said yes”, can “we” assume “you” said “no” or didn’t you vote?

I haven’t voted for 19 years and much happier for it

I hope you have been fined every year.

We don’t have elections every year?

wildturkeycanoe said :

gooterz said :

rommeldog56 said :

Well, when the full business case is released, it is bound to be an interestring read !

How much can you fit on the back of a napkin though?

Exaggerated patronage of half of expected total Gungahlin population [275000], using tram every day [5days x 48 weeks], at average daily cost of $5 per trip [above today’s MyWay daily fare] = a total repayment time of costs to construct this well over 20 years. That is just to break even folks, with an interest free loan and if the projected costs don’t blow out AND with a ridiculous assumption that it can transport half of Gungahlin to the city and back every day. In all likelihood the term will be well over double that. Whilst the Federal Government is trying to reign in our defecit, A.C.T is trying to make it much, much worse.
That’s about a napkin size isn’t it?

It’s embarrassing how the proponents for light rail are silent on all this common sense and logic against the Light Fantastic.

I would suggest that there are many, sensible, posters to this site that have realised arguing with you is pointless. This exception noted, I try and just avoid even reading the threads you spam up, let alone responding.

As a consequence, topics like light rail or climate change descend into one-sided ranting and a good portion of this site’s audience disengages. There’s not really a business case in that, I’d suggest.

Or could it be that you “and a good portion of the disengaging audience of this site” simply don’t like being challenged by common-sense and logic?

gooterz said :

dungfungus said :

rosscoact said :

dungfungus said :

rosscoact said :

Sandman said :

Why are elected public figures given authority to spend these amounts of money?

Because when the population of the ACT was asked before the election if they would elect a government that would deliver light rail you said yes and elected them. You gave them that authority.

Nice spin there.
What Katy Gallagher actually said, 2 years ago tomorrow was:
“If re-elected in 2012, ACT Labor will establish the ACT’s first large-scale private sector partnership to plan, finance and develop the first stage of a Light Rail Network for Canberra – the Capital Metro”.
Were were not “asked” we were told and ACT Labor did not get re-elected, they were able to form a minority government with the only Green candidate that was elected who happened to be campaigning for a light rail as well.
In saying that “you said yes”, can “we” assume “you” said “no” or didn’t you vote?

I haven’t voted for 19 years and much happier for it

I hope you have been fined every year.

We don’t have elections every year?

For the nit-pickers benefit I will spell it out: “every years there has been an election”. Happy now?
PS Do you always end a sentence with a question mark?

Antagonist said :

gooterz said :

rommeldog56 said :

Well, when the full business case is released, it is bound to be an interestring read !

How much can you fit on the back of a napkin though?

The Ros Kelly whiteboard incident immediately springs to mind here.

Or the Rudd/Conroy NBN drink coaster in flight.

dungfungus said :

gooterz said :

dungfungus said :

rosscoact said :

dungfungus said :

rosscoact said :

Sandman said :

Why are elected public figures given authority to spend these amounts of money?

Because when the population of the ACT was asked before the election if they would elect a government that would deliver light rail you said yes and elected them. You gave them that authority.

Nice spin there.
What Katy Gallagher actually said, 2 years ago tomorrow was:
“If re-elected in 2012, ACT Labor will establish the ACT’s first large-scale private sector partnership to plan, finance and develop the first stage of a Light Rail Network for Canberra – the Capital Metro”.
Were were not “asked” we were told and ACT Labor did not get re-elected, they were able to form a minority government with the only Green candidate that was elected who happened to be campaigning for a light rail as well.
In saying that “you said yes”, can “we” assume “you” said “no” or didn’t you vote?

I haven’t voted for 19 years and much happier for it

I hope you have been fined every year.

We don’t have elections every year?

wildturkeycanoe said :

gooterz said :

rommeldog56 said :

Well, when the full business case is released, it is bound to be an interestring read !

How much can you fit on the back of a napkin though?

Exaggerated patronage of half of expected total Gungahlin population [275000], using tram every day [5days x 48 weeks], at average daily cost of $5 per trip [above today’s MyWay daily fare] = a total repayment time of costs to construct this well over 20 years. That is just to break even folks, with an interest free loan and if the projected costs don’t blow out AND with a ridiculous assumption that it can transport half of Gungahlin to the city and back every day. In all likelihood the term will be well over double that. Whilst the Federal Government is trying to reign in our defecit, A.C.T is trying to make it much, much worse.
That’s about a napkin size isn’t it?

It’s embarrassing how the proponents for light rail are silent on all this common sense and logic against the Light Fantastic.

I would suggest that there are many, sensible, posters to this site that have realised arguing with you is pointless. This exception noted, I try and just avoid even reading the threads you spam up, let alone responding.

As a consequence, topics like light rail or climate change descend into one-sided ranting and a good portion of this site’s audience disengages. There’s not really a business case in that, I’d suggest.

VYBerlinaV8_is_back9:41 am 22 Sep 14

wildturkeycanoe said :

gooterz said :

rommeldog56 said :

Well, when the full business case is released, it is bound to be an interestring read !

How much can you fit on the back of a napkin though?

Exaggerated patronage of half of expected total Gungahlin population [275000], using tram every day [5days x 48 weeks], at average daily cost of $5 per trip [above today’s MyWay daily fare] = a total repayment time of costs to construct this well over 20 years. That is just to break even folks, with an interest free loan and if the projected costs don’t blow out AND with a ridiculous assumption that it can transport half of Gungahlin to the city and back every day. In all likelihood the term will be well over double that. Whilst the Federal Government is trying to reign in our defecit, A.C.T is trying to make it much, much worse.
That’s about a napkin size isn’t it?

And of course only half on Gungahlin ever needs to take a car to drop off or pick up kids, visit shops to or from work, socialise before or after work, or visit multiple places of work in a day. And of course they all work in the city.

The case for light rail is getting weaker by the day.

gooterz said :

rommeldog56 said :

Well, when the full business case is released, it is bound to be an interestring read !

How much can you fit on the back of a napkin though?

The Ros Kelly whiteboard incident immediately springs to mind here.

gooterz said :

dungfungus said :

rosscoact said :

dungfungus said :

rosscoact said :

Sandman said :

Why are elected public figures given authority to spend these amounts of money?

Because when the population of the ACT was asked before the election if they would elect a government that would deliver light rail you said yes and elected them. You gave them that authority.

Nice spin there.
What Katy Gallagher actually said, 2 years ago tomorrow was:
“If re-elected in 2012, ACT Labor will establish the ACT’s first large-scale private sector partnership to plan, finance and develop the first stage of a Light Rail Network for Canberra – the Capital Metro”.
Were were not “asked” we were told and ACT Labor did not get re-elected, they were able to form a minority government with the only Green candidate that was elected who happened to be campaigning for a light rail as well.
In saying that “you said yes”, can “we” assume “you” said “no” or didn’t you vote?

I haven’t voted for 19 years and much happier for it

I hope you have been fined every year.

We don’t have elections every year?

wildturkeycanoe said :

gooterz said :

rommeldog56 said :

Well, when the full business case is released, it is bound to be an interestring read !

How much can you fit on the back of a napkin though?

Exaggerated patronage of half of expected total Gungahlin population [275000], using tram every day [5days x 48 weeks], at average daily cost of $5 per trip [above today’s MyWay daily fare] = a total repayment time of costs to construct this well over 20 years. That is just to break even folks, with an interest free loan and if the projected costs don’t blow out AND with a ridiculous assumption that it can transport half of Gungahlin to the city and back every day. In all likelihood the term will be well over double that. Whilst the Federal Government is trying to reign in our defecit, A.C.T is trying to make it much, much worse.
That’s about a napkin size isn’t it?

It’s embarrassing how the proponents for light rail are silent on all this common sense and logic against the Light Fantastic.

wildturkeycanoe5:56 am 22 Sep 14

gooterz said :

rommeldog56 said :

Well, when the full business case is released, it is bound to be an interestring read !

How much can you fit on the back of a napkin though?

Exaggerated patronage of half of expected total Gungahlin population [275000], using tram every day [5days x 48 weeks], at average daily cost of $5 per trip [above today’s MyWay daily fare] = a total repayment time of costs to construct this well over 20 years. That is just to break even folks, with an interest free loan and if the projected costs don’t blow out AND with a ridiculous assumption that it can transport half of Gungahlin to the city and back every day. In all likelihood the term will be well over double that. Whilst the Federal Government is trying to reign in our defecit, A.C.T is trying to make it much, much worse.
That’s about a napkin size isn’t it?

dungfungus said :

rosscoact said :

dungfungus said :

rosscoact said :

Sandman said :

Why are elected public figures given authority to spend these amounts of money?

Because when the population of the ACT was asked before the election if they would elect a government that would deliver light rail you said yes and elected them. You gave them that authority.

Nice spin there.
What Katy Gallagher actually said, 2 years ago tomorrow was:
“If re-elected in 2012, ACT Labor will establish the ACT’s first large-scale private sector partnership to plan, finance and develop the first stage of a Light Rail Network for Canberra – the Capital Metro”.
Were were not “asked” we were told and ACT Labor did not get re-elected, they were able to form a minority government with the only Green candidate that was elected who happened to be campaigning for a light rail as well.
In saying that “you said yes”, can “we” assume “you” said “no” or didn’t you vote?

I haven’t voted for 19 years and much happier for it

I hope you have been fined every year.

We don’t have elections every year?

rosscoact said :

dungfungus said :

rosscoact said :

Sandman said :

Why are elected public figures given authority to spend these amounts of money?

Because when the population of the ACT was asked before the election if they would elect a government that would deliver light rail you said yes and elected them. You gave them that authority.

Nice spin there.
What Katy Gallagher actually said, 2 years ago tomorrow was:
“If re-elected in 2012, ACT Labor will establish the ACT’s first large-scale private sector partnership to plan, finance and develop the first stage of a Light Rail Network for Canberra – the Capital Metro”.
Were were not “asked” we were told and ACT Labor did not get re-elected, they were able to form a minority government with the only Green candidate that was elected who happened to be campaigning for a light rail as well.
In saying that “you said yes”, can “we” assume “you” said “no” or didn’t you vote?

I haven’t voted for 19 years and much happier for it

I hope you have been fined every year.

rommeldog56 said :

Well, when the full business case is released, it is bound to be an interestring read !

How much can you fit on the back of a napkin though?

dungfungus said :

rosscoact said :

Sandman said :

Why are elected public figures given authority to spend these amounts of money?

Because when the population of the ACT was asked before the election if they would elect a government that would deliver light rail you said yes and elected them. You gave them that authority.

Nice spin there.
What Katy Gallagher actually said, 2 years ago tomorrow was:
“If re-elected in 2012, ACT Labor will establish the ACT’s first large-scale private sector partnership to plan, finance and develop the first stage of a Light Rail Network for Canberra – the Capital Metro”.
Were were not “asked” we were told and ACT Labor did not get re-elected, they were able to form a minority government with the only Green candidate that was elected who happened to be campaigning for a light rail as well.
In saying that “you said yes”, can “we” assume “you” said “no” or didn’t you vote?

I haven’t voted for 19 years and much happier for it

bigred said :

dungfungus said :

bigred said :

I agree with the decision but still reckon it will not happen due to vested interests. My prediction is around 5 or 6 months out from the next election, under threat of TWU withdrawal of election donations, the Government will tell us they tried everything but cannot make it work. Greens will scream blue murder, but will be irrelevant in the pre election period and TWU will be happily driving ACTION buses for ever more. Threat over. Toot toot!

This is one of the “sleepers” I referred to in an earlier post. There is a big disparity between wages of bus drivers and tram divers globally. The bus driver obviously has more responsibility as he has to steer his vehicle.
It is likely that the TWU will insist on wages parity for tram drivers, as commensurate with tram services displacing existing bus services (there is a finite number of public transport customers on an existing route), the surplus bus drivers will be seeking transfer to the trams.
The government may find that a river to wide to cross.
Once again, it may be timely to look at privatising Action. Why not offer incentives to their staff to start a cooperative to take over and run Action? It has been done successfully in other areas.

But the sleeper is that TWU does not cover tram drivers. But it donates big time to local ALP.
The Rail Tram and Bus Union (RTBU) represents the industrial interests of Melbourne tram drivers but its name suggests it also covers bus drivers (but not in Melbourne).
Not being any trams in the ACT before there indeed could be a tussle for control. Whoever gives the most in donations at the next election will probably get the franchise.

rosscoact said :

Sandman said :

Why are elected public figures given authority to spend these amounts of money?

Because when the population of the ACT was asked before the election if they would elect a government that would deliver light rail you said yes and elected them. You gave them that authority.

Nice spin there.
What Katy Gallagher actually said, 2 years ago tomorrow was:
“If re-elected in 2012, ACT Labor will establish the ACT’s first large-scale private sector partnership to plan, finance and develop the first stage of a Light Rail Network for Canberra – the Capital Metro”.
Were were not “asked” we were told and ACT Labor did not get re-elected, they were able to form a minority government with the only Green candidate that was elected who happened to be campaigning for a light rail as well.
In saying that “you said yes”, can “we” assume “you” said “no” or didn’t you vote?

Sandman said :

Why are elected public figures given authority to spend these amounts of money?

Because when the population of the ACT was asked before the election if they would elect a government that would deliver light rail you said yes and elected them. You gave them that authority.

dungfungus said :

bigred said :

I agree with the decision but still reckon it will not happen due to vested interests. My prediction is around 5 or 6 months out from the next election, under threat of TWU withdrawal of election donations, the Government will tell us they tried everything but cannot make it work. Greens will scream blue murder, but will be irrelevant in the pre election period and TWU will be happily driving ACTION buses for ever more. Threat over. Toot toot!

This is one of the “sleepers” I referred to in an earlier post. There is a big disparity between wages of bus drivers and tram divers globally. The bus driver obviously has more responsibility as he has to steer his vehicle.
It is likely that the TWU will insist on wages parity for tram drivers, as commensurate with tram services displacing existing bus services (there is a finite number of public transport customers on an existing route), the surplus bus drivers will be seeking transfer to the trams.
The government may find that a river to wide to cross.
Once again, it may be timely to look at privatising Action. Why not offer incentives to their staff to start a cooperative to take over and run Action? It has been done successfully in other areas.

But the sleeper is that TWU does not cover tram drivers. But it donates big time to local ALP.
Big demarkation dispute coming.

wildturkeycanoe said :

dungfungus said :

rosscoact said :

dkNigs said :

rosscoact said :

– It’s a bit hard to do infrastructure work without traffic being inconvenienced, it’s the nature of the beast. Traffic is likely to flow better after construction because finally Northbourne lights will be synced.

Oh but they are synced. To the old 70kmph limit :p

By gosh, I think you might be onto something there
The “modern” tram is designed to run at a maximum speed of 70km but this wouldn’t be on Northbourne Avenue with all those cross streets and tram stops.

How many can remember when it was 70kmh there? I think it came back to 60kmh when the League in Lycra demanded their own lane so they could get to their coffee shops quicker.

Wishful thinking to say that the tram will do 70km/h down Northbourne. Not all the people on board come from Gungahlin shopping center and work at London Circuit. The tram WILL stop many many times on it’s route and probably won’t get to it’s maximum speed. If there is supposed to be a corridor down Northbourne where residents from Dickson, Downer, Watson, O’Connor and Lyneham want to jump on board I am afraid the tram will not be delivering those from the north on time. An 11 minute trip will blow out due to drop offs and pickups, whilst an absence of regular services means those on the Northbourne stretch will have to walk or catch a bus to get to work or wait for the next regular hourly service. It is the same as the ACTION network now, the express gets slowed down by the masses at one end of the run then speeds through, the ones half way along have to wait for hourly services, thus delaying their arrival.
To rephrase an old EXPRESSion “You can transport some of the people all of the time, and all of the people some of the time, but you cannot transport all of the people all of the time”

A Melbourne tram in a similar environment to the proposed City to Gungahlin route travels about 12km in 1 hour. There won’t be any jet-lagged travellers on Capital Metro either.

blisteringbarnacles said :

dungfungus said :

The ABC has reported that the new Gold Coast light rail carried its one millionth passenger two days ago.
Daily passenger numbers started at 13,000 and now 17,000 a day are being carried (some days up to 20,000).
This is over a 13km route with a population pool of about 550,000 which equates to 3.09% population usage if 17,000 passengers per day is factored in.
The Capital Metro City to Gungahlin route is a similar distance but the population pool is only about 50,000.
Using the 3.09% as a benchmark, this equates to 1,545 passengers using the Capital Metro light rail daily.
The government owned Gold Coast bus services that still exist have had to pare back their services due to passenger losses to the trams. The bus fleet also needs urgent upgrading.
My methodology may be a bit simplistic and my calculations may be wrong but if they are right, God help us.

I can see the Gold Coast rail being very successful. Why? It is a tourist mecca. You may have 550,000 living there but you also have all the tourists who will use it all day long. I have friends living in The Hague (pop density 6,000sqkm) and love the public transport system with bus, tram, light rail and rail networks.
The only use City-Gungahlin will get is peak hour.
I found an excellent US study done in 2010 titled ‘The Case against Rail Transport’. You can read it here: http://www.cato.org/sites/cato.org/files/pubs/pdf/pa663.pdf
Lots of stats.

An interesting read in the link – even if it is 4 years old, the basic principles/concepts would still apply.
But, the ACT Gov’t is captive to its own idelogy and the to Greens. Besides, they have paid “consultants” heaps of Ratepayers $ to prove that most of the studies and experiences worldwide are wrong – that the ACT Gov’t knows best and can do it better (despite their record in major infrastructure developments, lack of existing population density in Canberra, the huge Territory budget deficit, etc).

Im sure that the business case will be a great read !

dungfungus said :

Canberra City to Gungahlin doesn’t have the population density of The Hague or the tourists of the Gold Coast so what hope has the chosen route got?
If the route was from Bungendore, Queanbeyan, Fyshwick (using existing railroad) then to Canberra airport and on to City via Russell it would probably break even and move 10,000 passengers a day as well as taking hundreds of cars off the road.

Please don’t bring logic to the-riotact.. its not welcome!

wildturkeycanoe12:51 am 20 Sep 14

dungfungus said :

rosscoact said :

dkNigs said :

rosscoact said :

– It’s a bit hard to do infrastructure work without traffic being inconvenienced, it’s the nature of the beast. Traffic is likely to flow better after construction because finally Northbourne lights will be synced.

Oh but they are synced. To the old 70kmph limit :p

By gosh, I think you might be onto something there
The “modern” tram is designed to run at a maximum speed of 70km but this wouldn’t be on Northbourne Avenue with all those cross streets and tram stops.

How many can remember when it was 70kmh there? I think it came back to 60kmh when the League in Lycra demanded their own lane so they could get to their coffee shops quicker.

Wishful thinking to say that the tram will do 70km/h down Northbourne. Not all the people on board come from Gungahlin shopping center and work at London Circuit. The tram WILL stop many many times on it’s route and probably won’t get to it’s maximum speed. If there is supposed to be a corridor down Northbourne where residents from Dickson, Downer, Watson, O’Connor and Lyneham want to jump on board I am afraid the tram will not be delivering those from the north on time. An 11 minute trip will blow out due to drop offs and pickups, whilst an absence of regular services means those on the Northbourne stretch will have to walk or catch a bus to get to work or wait for the next regular hourly service. It is the same as the ACTION network now, the express gets slowed down by the masses at one end of the run then speeds through, the ones half way along have to wait for hourly services, thus delaying their arrival.
To rephrase an old EXPRESSion “You can transport some of the people all of the time, and all of the people some of the time, but you cannot transport all of the people all of the time”

blisteringbarnacles12:07 am 20 Sep 14

A light rail still needs to be supported by feeder buses. So, if you live in Casey you have to catch a bus to the Gungahlin station ($4.50 or $2.84MyWay) and then pay another $5+ to the city – 1 way. The Government would have to bring in a multi-pass system like other cities. So increasing overall losses to both transport networks. Sydney is currently $46 per week which includes rail, bus and ferries.
Light rail is vastly expensive to build and only reaches to where the tracks end. They are generally slow averaging 35kph including stops.

So we all know it’s not viable….what alternatives are there?

At a lower capital and operating cost, a rapid bus system would be the best option for Canberra. Simpler, faster, adaptable, more efficient, can be implemented in stages and can transport more people (see Brisbane BRT or Curitiba in Brazil with 2million passengers per day). The bus lanes bypass traffic and can reach every urban area.This would increase passenger numbers as it reaches more areas. A US study (US.GAO) shows operating costs per km to be between 50-80% cheaper than LTR and 50% faster. A bus lane can be built a lot quicker and cheaper than a rail line. Buses are also easily repaired and don’t stop when electricity fails. Sure, if we all run out of fuel….bicycles it is.

A long term plan is needed, not a short sighted one.
I can never see a train going over Commonwealth Ave Bridge.

“Light rail is not the solution, its an expensive way of getting less people from A to B than what buses can do”.

Why are elected public figures given authority to spend these amounts of money?

I’m not a Liberal lover, you couldn’t pay me to vote for them. I still think this tram/train is a solidly stupid idea though.

My $10 each way bet goes on – Labour will build it, it will be declared an immediate failure because it isn’t running at maximum capacity on opening day, the sheeple will vote Labour out and then the Libs will sell it to Terry Snow for 5c in the dollar.

Canberra City to Gungahlin doesn’t have the population density of The Hague or the tourists of the Gold Coast so what hope has the chosen route got?
If the route was from Bungendore, Queanbeyan, Fyshwick (using existing railroad) then to Canberra airport and on to City via Russell it would probably break even and move 10,000 passengers a day as well as taking hundreds of cars off the road.

You just gotta have faith Dung, my son.

Either that or have a frontal labotomy so you can accept that the ACT Government knows best…….. ?

blisteringbarnacles said :

dungfungus said :

The ABC has reported that the new Gold Coast light rail carried its one millionth passenger two days ago.
Daily passenger numbers started at 13,000 and now 17,000 a day are being carried (some days up to 20,000).
This is over a 13km route with a population pool of about 550,000 which equates to 3.09% population usage if 17,000 passengers per day is factored in.
The Capital Metro City to Gungahlin route is a similar distance but the population pool is only about 50,000.
Using the 3.09% as a benchmark, this equates to 1,545 passengers using the Capital Metro light rail daily.
The government owned Gold Coast bus services that still exist have had to pare back their services due to passenger losses to the trams. The bus fleet also needs urgent upgrading.
My methodology may be a bit simplistic and my calculations may be wrong but if they are right, God help us.

I can see the Gold Coast rail being very successful. Why? It is a tourist mecca. You may have 550,000 living there but you also have all the tourists who will use it all day long. I have friends living in The Hague (pop density 6,000sqkm) and love the public transport system with bus, tram, light rail and rail networks.
The only use City-Gungahlin will get is peak hour.
I found an excellent US study done in 2010 titled ‘The Case against Rail Transport’. You can read it here: http://www.cato.org/sites/cato.org/files/pubs/pdf/pa663.pdf
Lots of stats.

Canberra City to Gungahlin doesn’t have the population density of The Hague or the tourists of the Gold Coast so what hope has the chosen route got?
If the route was from Bungendore, Queanbeyan, Fyshwick (using existing railroad) then to Canberra airport and on to City via Russell it would probably break even and move 10,000 passengers a day as well as taking hundreds of cars off the road.

From the link in the OP :

“The project will be paid for through the value uplift associated with Transit Oriented Development, recycling of assets (such as the sale of ACT TAB and the sale of surface car parks) and transport related efficiencies.”

Q : What is a “value uplift associated with Transit Oriented Development” mean ? Must have taken someone ages to come up with those words.Is this a “fudge factor” to make the BCR more than 1:1 ?

Q : What surface car parks will be “sold” – and where ? Hopefully reduced car parks will only affect those in North Canberra/Gunners who support the light rail !

Q : What “transport related efficiencies” ? Is this another fudge factor, a “green” factor, or is it savings in the ACTION bus fleet via through services/drivers, etc.

wildturkeycanoe6:43 pm 19 Sep 14

Because our trams will not be solar powered like the one in Springfield, what happens when the power goes out? All aboard the bus network, unless the tram is half way across Barry Drive or something.
For future expansion of the line to Belconnen, we must also consider that the trams being used cannot navigate gradients like the Barry Drive link to Belconnen, so I guess technology will have to come to the rescue by 2030 or whenever/if they expand that far. By then, I think a better alternative will be available anyway.

rosscoact said :

dkNigs said :

rosscoact said :

– It’s a bit hard to do infrastructure work without traffic being inconvenienced, it’s the nature of the beast. Traffic is likely to flow better after construction because finally Northbourne lights will be synced.

Oh but they are synced. To the old 70kmph limit :p

By gosh, I think you might be onto something there

The “modern” tram is designed to run at a maximum speed of 70km but this wouldn’t be on Northbourne Avenue with all those cross streets and tram stops.
How many can remember when it was 70kmh there? I think it came back to 60kmh when the League in Lycra demanded their own lane so they could get to their coffee shops quicker.

blisteringbarnacles5:31 pm 19 Sep 14

dungfungus said :

The ABC has reported that the new Gold Coast light rail carried its one millionth passenger two days ago.
Daily passenger numbers started at 13,000 and now 17,000 a day are being carried (some days up to 20,000).
This is over a 13km route with a population pool of about 550,000 which equates to 3.09% population usage if 17,000 passengers per day is factored in.
The Capital Metro City to Gungahlin route is a similar distance but the population pool is only about 50,000.
Using the 3.09% as a benchmark, this equates to 1,545 passengers using the Capital Metro light rail daily.
The government owned Gold Coast bus services that still exist have had to pare back their services due to passenger losses to the trams. The bus fleet also needs urgent upgrading.
My methodology may be a bit simplistic and my calculations may be wrong but if they are right, God help us.

I can see the Gold Coast rail being very successful. Why? It is a tourist mecca. You may have 550,000 living there but you also have all the tourists who will use it all day long. I have friends living in The Hague (pop density 6,000sqkm) and love the public transport system with bus, tram, light rail and rail networks.
The only use City-Gungahlin will get is peak hour.
I found an excellent US study done in 2010 titled ‘The Case against Rail Transport’. You can read it here: http://www.cato.org/sites/cato.org/files/pubs/pdf/pa663.pdf
Lots of stats.

Well, when the full business case is released, it is bound to be an interestring read !

dkNigs said :

rosscoact said :

– It’s a bit hard to do infrastructure work without traffic being inconvenienced, it’s the nature of the beast. Traffic is likely to flow better after construction because finally Northbourne lights will be synced.

Oh but they are synced. To the old 70kmph limit :p

By gosh, I think you might be onto something there

rosscoact said :

– It’s a bit hard to do infrastructure work without traffic being inconvenienced, it’s the nature of the beast. Traffic is likely to flow better after construction because finally Northbourne lights will be synced.

Oh but they are synced. To the old 70kmph limit :p

The ABC has reported that the new Gold Coast light rail carried its one millionth passenger two days ago.
Daily passenger numbers started at 13,000 and now 17,000 a day are being carried (some days up to 20,000).
This is over a 13km route with a population pool of about 550,000 which equates to 3.09% population usage if 17,000 passengers per day is factored in.
The Capital Metro City to Gungahlin route is a similar distance but the population pool is only about 50,000.
Using the 3.09% as a benchmark, this equates to 1,545 passengers using the Capital Metro light rail daily.
The government owned Gold Coast bus services that still exist have had to pare back their services due to passenger losses to the trams. The bus fleet also needs urgent upgrading.
My methodology may be a bit simplistic and my calculations may be wrong but if they are right, God help us.

2604 said :

Holden Caulfield said :

Light rail for Canberra is one of the dumbest ideas ever and most people knew this while they still had a chance to vote in the Libs.

Let me get this straight. You acknowledge that Labor is implementing “one of the dumbest ideas ever”. But you actually think that is the fault of the Liberal party? And nothing to do with Labor and all the drones who voted for it?

Your post illustrates my point perfectly. Canberrans are just too dumb and ill-informed to think critically about anything Labor does. When Labor screws up, it’s the fault of the Libs, Tony Abbott, Rupert Murdoch, anyone other than Labor politicians.

Do you realize with comments like that you could be the next dissenter to appear before the self-appointed RiotAct Star Court?

bigred said :

I agree with the decision but still reckon it will not happen due to vested interests. My prediction is around 5 or 6 months out from the next election, under threat of TWU withdrawal of election donations, the Government will tell us they tried everything but cannot make it work. Greens will scream blue murder, but will be irrelevant in the pre election period and TWU will be happily driving ACTION buses for ever more. Threat over. Toot toot!

This is one of the “sleepers” I referred to in an earlier post. There is a big disparity between wages of bus drivers and tram divers globally. The bus driver obviously has more responsibility as he has to steer his vehicle.
It is likely that the TWU will insist on wages parity for tram drivers, as commensurate with tram services displacing existing bus services (there is a finite number of public transport customers on an existing route), the surplus bus drivers will be seeking transfer to the trams.
The government may find that a river to wide to cross.
Once again, it may be timely to look at privatising Action. Why not offer incentives to their staff to start a cooperative to take over and run Action? It has been done successfully in other areas.

I agree with the decision but still reckon it will not happen due to vested interests. My prediction is around 5 or 6 months out from the next election, under threat of TWU withdrawal of election donations, the Government will tell us they tried everything but cannot make it work. Greens will scream blue murder, but will be irrelevant in the pre election period and TWU will be happily driving ACTION buses for ever more. Threat over. Toot toot!

Holden Caulfield said :

Light rail for Canberra is one of the dumbest ideas ever and most people knew this while they still had a chance to vote in the Libs.

Let me get this straight. You acknowledge that Labor is implementing “one of the dumbest ideas ever”. But you actually think that is the fault of the Liberal party? And nothing to do with Labor and all the drones who voted for it?

Your post illustrates my point perfectly. Canberrans are just too dumb and ill-informed to think critically about anything Labor does. When Labor screws up, it’s the fault of the Libs, Tony Abbott, Rupert Murdoch, anyone other than Labor politicians.

dungfungus said :

rosscoact said :

I think all of your questions have been in the public space for quite a while but if you like, I can give you some common sense answers.

What are the expected ticket prices of the Tram?

– about the same as a bus

Given that ACTION currently makes about a $100 million dollar a year loss, how much loss is a tram going to do?

– business case is coming out in a few weeks, I guess I can wait that long to find out

Given its a PPP what is the government’s share of the loss? are they promising a return on investment?

– see question above

Why start in Gungahlin? That only leaves one/two options to extend.. A central tram would be able to used by more people in Canberra and have more options for extension.

– It isn’t starting in Gungahlin, it is starting in the city. It goes out to Gungahlin because it has to go somewhere first.

Why down the middle of Northbourne?

– Wide corridors make it easy to build, thus costing less money without inconveniencing people

What impact on traffic during construction/ after. Wouldn’t a 5 minute delay for many people completely out do the CBA.

– It’s a bit hard to do infrastructure work without traffic being inconvenienced, it’s the nature of the beast. Traffic is likely to flow better after construction because finally Northbourne lights will be synced.

Where is the latest ACTION mywaydata data to say what the expected patronage is? –

Giving a rough estimate when there is that much data is questionable.

– Can’t help you there. Have you tried Action?

Where are the door to door surveys asking if people in the area’s will actually use light rail?

– you don’t need door to door survey’s, only representative data collection. That’s been done

How come we have a final cost of 610 million when we haven’t even gone to tender yet?

– Cost estimation is a normal part of project planning. I don’t believe that I’ve heard what the cost is, as it hasn’t gone out to tender.

Are they going to source from Australia and keep the money local or go overseas to save a buck and screw up the economy?

– I’m not sure how many light rail carriage builders there are in Australia. Probably not a big enough market for a competitive industry.

Why is there no draft plan of the rest of the network or even a first possible extension?

– I’ve seen one either in the CT or on their website. It said something like first extension was expected to be to Russell.

How many carparks are likely to go and from where? is it likely to be more than the number of people expected to come via tram?

– Not quite sure how to answer that. Are you saying that there will be more cars than passengers on the tram? Will they be towing trailers with a spare car on the back? I’ll be walking to the station as will others, I think that’s the point of increasing the density.

What will lightrail do that traffic light pre-emption and bus networks wont?

– get me as a passenger as a start

You call those “answers”?
More like opinion.

It’s good to see that you agree with the content though. There’s hope for you yet!

dungfungus said :

rosscoact said :

Great day! An excellent project endorsed by the majority of Canberrans

How can you say that?
It’s preposterous to say “the majority” of Canberrans support the project.
Where is any proof that points to that?.

In the absence of any proof we will accept that what you said is purely opinion.

Will the carriages have funny cartoons of rhinos like the trams in Melbourne?? Remember to factor in the cost of the park and ride carpark tickets you gungahlinites (sic) will need to buy if you don’t live near the terminus.

rosscoact said :

I think all of your questions have been in the public space for quite a while but if you like, I can give you some common sense answers.

What are the expected ticket prices of the Tram?

– about the same as a bus

Given that ACTION currently makes about a $100 million dollar a year loss, how much loss is a tram going to do?

– business case is coming out in a few weeks, I guess I can wait that long to find out

Given its a PPP what is the government’s share of the loss? are they promising a return on investment?

– see question above

Why start in Gungahlin? That only leaves one/two options to extend.. A central tram would be able to used by more people in Canberra and have more options for extension.

– It isn’t starting in Gungahlin, it is starting in the city. It goes out to Gungahlin because it has to go somewhere first.

Why down the middle of Northbourne?

– Wide corridors make it easy to build, thus costing less money without inconveniencing people

What impact on traffic during construction/ after. Wouldn’t a 5 minute delay for many people completely out do the CBA.

– It’s a bit hard to do infrastructure work without traffic being inconvenienced, it’s the nature of the beast. Traffic is likely to flow better after construction because finally Northbourne lights will be synced.

Where is the latest ACTION mywaydata data to say what the expected patronage is? –

Giving a rough estimate when there is that much data is questionable.

– Can’t help you there. Have you tried Action?

Where are the door to door surveys asking if people in the area’s will actually use light rail?

– you don’t need door to door survey’s, only representative data collection. That’s been done

How come we have a final cost of 610 million when we haven’t even gone to tender yet?

– Cost estimation is a normal part of project planning. I don’t believe that I’ve heard what the cost is, as it hasn’t gone out to tender.

Are they going to source from Australia and keep the money local or go overseas to save a buck and screw up the economy?

– I’m not sure how many light rail carriage builders there are in Australia. Probably not a big enough market for a competitive industry.

Why is there no draft plan of the rest of the network or even a first possible extension?

– I’ve seen one either in the CT or on their website. It said something like first extension was expected to be to Russell.

How many carparks are likely to go and from where? is it likely to be more than the number of people expected to come via tram?

– Not quite sure how to answer that. Are you saying that there will be more cars than passengers on the tram? Will they be towing trailers with a spare car on the back? I’ll be walking to the station as will others, I think that’s the point of increasing the density.

What will lightrail do that traffic light pre-emption and bus networks wont?

– get me as a passenger as a start

You call those “answers”?
More like opinion.

gazket said :

it’s now 3 days later the 18/9 and the train has blown out and extra $50 million already.

For the benefit of some others on this thread, does that include GST?

it’s now 3 days later the 18/9 and the train has blown out and extra $50 million already.

watto23 said :

Ben_Dover said :

Total cost – 783 million dollars. Construction will begin in 2016 with service expected to begin in 2019/20.

Yeah sure, I have a bridge you may wish to consider buying, to go with the light rail.

If we vote in Labour again after this farce we deserve all we get.

To be fair, people voted them in knowing they were going to build it, unlike the federal election where most of whats been done was not known. I think it will take a miracle for a majority liberal or Labor government in Canberra, so unless PUP gains grip in Canberra greens will still probably hold the balance of power.

Given the inept fiscal management and decision making demonstrated by the current Labor/Greens ACT Gov’t and what appears to be a lack of a compelling viable option in the form of the ACT Lib’s, a PUP alternative is looking strangly attractive all of a sudden…………!

I think all of your questions have been in the public space for quite a while but if you like, I can give you some common sense answers.

What are the expected ticket prices of the Tram? – about the same as a bus

Given that ACTION currently makes about a $100 million dollar a year loss, how much loss is a tram going to do? – business case is coming out in a few weeks, I guess I can wait that long to find out

Given its a PPP what is the government’s share of the loss? are they promising a return on investment? – see question above

Why start in Gungahlin? That only leaves one/two options to extend.. A central tram would be able to used by more people in Canberra and have more options for extension. – It isn’t starting in Gungahlin, it is starting in the city. It goes out to Gungahlin because it has to go somewhere first.

Why down the middle of Northbourne? – Wide corridors make it easy to build, thus costing less money without inconveniencing people

What impact on traffic during construction/ after. Wouldn’t a 5 minute delay for many people completely out do the CBA. – It’s a bit hard to do infrastructure work without traffic being inconvenienced, it’s the nature of the beast. Traffic is likely to flow better after construction because finally Northbourne lights will be synced.

Where is the latest ACTION mywaydata data to say what the expected patronage is? – Giving a rough estimate when there is that much data is questionable. – Can’t help you there. Have you tried Action?

Where are the door to door surveys asking if people in the area’s will actually use light rail? – you don’t need door to door survey’s, only representative data collection. That’s been done

How come we have a final cost of 610 million when we haven’t even gone to tender yet? – Cost estimation is a normal part of project planning. I don’t believe that I’ve heard what the cost is, as it hasn’t gone out to tender.

Are they going to source from Australia and keep the money local or go overseas to save a buck and screw up the economy? – I’m not sure how many light rail carriage builders there are in Australia. Probably not a big enough market for a competitive industry.

Why is there no draft plan of the rest of the network or even a first possible extension? – I’ve seen one either in the CT or on their website. It said something like first extension was expected to be to Russell.

How many carparks are likely to go and from where? is it likely to be more than the number of people expected to come via tram? – Not quite sure how to answer that. Are you saying that there will be more cars than passengers on the tram? Will they be towing trailers with a spare car on the back? I’ll be walking to the station as will others, I think that’s the point of increasing the density.

What will lightrail do that traffic light pre-emption and bus networks wont? – get me as a passenger as a start

Holden Caulfield11:13 am 18 Sep 14

2604 said :

Like any sane Canberran, I am dismayed by this decision.

The Greens deserve our contempt because this project smacks of their juvenile approach to governance. They always demand the theoretical best solution to everything, irrespective of how great the cost to the community, or how minor the benefit.

Labor deserves our contempt because, once again, they have put the interests of their union paymasters ahead of the interests of the population whose interests they are elected and paid to represent. The hideously overpaid ACTION workforce of drivers, mechanics and ancilliary staff will need to be duplicated to staff the light rail. A huge payday for the TWU, who no doubt had some say in the decision to proceed with this project.

Most of all, ACT voters deserve our contempt. No matter how fiscally irresponsible Labor is, no matter how egregious the annual increases in rates, fees and charges are, no matter how many pie-in-the-sky ideas Labor comes up with and implements (badly), ACT people keep voting for them. Honestly, Labor could run an election ticket in the ACT featuring Adolf Hitler, Idi Amin and Pol Pot and still romp it in, because most Canberrans developed an aversion to the Liberals whilst undergraduate university students and haven’t have the brains or maturity to re-examine that position since.

Oh yes, it’s all the fault of the voting public that the Libs in the ACT are apparently unable to form a viable opposition. Haha, that’s brilliant!

The contempt of look-at-me-everyone-I’m-Zed-and-I-couldn’t-win-a-local-election-so-bulldozed-my-way-into-a-lazy-Senate-soiree wouldn’t have anything to do with lack of appeal for the tories, would it?

Light rail for Canberra is one of the dumbest ideas ever and most people knew this while they still had a chance to vote in the Libs.

Maybe it’s the Libs who should draft in Hitler, Amin and Pot—in place of Smyth, Coe and Jones—it would probably improve their chances at the next election.

blisteringbarnacles said :

Light rail will be a good idea in 30yrs time when we have the population density to warrant it. I have researched light rail in other cities in the US, UK and Europe. Here are some stats on similar light rail:
Approx. 0.5-15% of the cities population will use light rail – the more the traffic problems, the more use public transport.
Houston Texas – population density 1,300 per sqkm – 1.8% use it. Fare: $1.25
Charlotte NC – population density 862 per sqkm – 2% use it. Fare: 2.20
Nottingham UK – population density 4,073 per sqkm – 3.5% use it. Fare:2 pounds
Edmonton Canada – pop density 1,186 per sqkm – 13% use it. Fare $3.50
Minneapolis USA – pop density 2,800 per sqkm – 0.5% use it. Fare:1.75

Canberra -population density 440 per sqkm
Gungahlin higher at 520.
So, the population of Gungahlin will be around 70,000 by 2020. Let’s assume that 50,000 travel to work and say 25,000 travel to the city or gungahlin (being generous I think)
Say 4% (generous again) catch the train which is approx 1,000 people. Ticket price $5.

Does a 700million dollar loan at 5% costing $35,000,000 a year plus the rail running loss and running costs of this sound feasible in the least?

LABOR AND THE GREENS HAVE LOST THE PLOT. UNBELIEVABLE!!

Not all tram ventures have a fairy-tale ending.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/V%C3%A9lez-M%C3%A1laga_Tram
There is a strong Australia connection with this story being two of the CAF trams that were mothballed after the service closed have since been transferred to the Sydney (Lilyfield) light rail. They have not been very reliable either.
It is very possible this could happen in Canberra as the patronage for the Capital Metro City-Gungahlin route is unknown and if the failure of some PPPs in Sydney and Brisbane (road tunnels) is a guide, the patronage will be about 50% less than estimated.
I would like to know what the government’s contingency plan is if the PPP fails.
I still doubt that the project will attract a PPP and if it does the it will have to be overweighted with government subsidy so high that the annual $110 million subsidy to Action will look cheap.
These are the questions the Canberra Liberals should be asking.
If the government insists of proceeding with the light rail folly then it would be better if it was funded by debt and be owned and operated by the government. With our AAA credit rating and a lot of investors (Industry Super Funds?) lining up to invest in Australian infrastructure it should be easy to sell 10 year bonds at less than 3% pa.
At least that way we would be able to see how much the project was going to cost.
I think we all know that it won’t be viable whatever way it is funded.

HiddenDragon said :

It’s shaping up to be like something out of eastern bloc Europe, with a tacky, expensive makeover, coming to Northbourne Avenue and parts thereabout…

And that is what I am afraid of. Flemington is already stuffed. Almost every development there has retail on the ground floor, but there is very little parking associated with it. That My Parea cafe (nice coffee by the way) has maybe five other business around it in total at the moment and the nature strip has already been destroyed because of all the cars parking anywhere they can. Sure the businesses there should be targeting the immediate neighbourhood, but it’s going to be a cluster truck later on because there isn’t even enough parking for the people living in the apartments.

The thing is, I like the idea of a tram system. Canberra will grow way past half a million and we need something in addition to buses. Innsbruck (Austria) has a population of some 120000 and even they have trams AND buses for local transport. Sure, the density is 1200/sqkm, but if all the developments along Flemington and Northbourne are finsihed and populated, we’d be hitting that easily along that corridor.

Anyway, as I’m rambling, I’ll summarise: I like the tram and I don’t like car traffic, but sure as anything, I know that they’ll screw up whatever they try…and they won’t admit it and then they’ll be angry that we don’t like their visionary personality.

blisteringbarnacles10:44 pm 17 Sep 14

Light rail will be a good idea in 30yrs time when we have the population density to warrant it. I have researched light rail in other cities in the US, UK and Europe. Here are some stats on similar light rail:
Approx. 0.5-15% of the cities population will use light rail – the more the traffic problems, the more use public transport.
Houston Texas – population density 1,300 per sqkm – 1.8% use it. Fare: $1.25
Charlotte NC – population density 862 per sqkm – 2% use it. Fare: 2.20
Nottingham UK – population density 4,073 per sqkm – 3.5% use it. Fare:2 pounds
Edmonton Canada – pop density 1,186 per sqkm – 13% use it. Fare $3.50
Minneapolis USA – pop density 2,800 per sqkm – 0.5% use it. Fare:1.75

Canberra -population density 440 per sqkm
Gungahlin higher at 520.
So, the population of Gungahlin will be around 70,000 by 2020. Let’s assume that 50,000 travel to work and say 25,000 travel to the city or gungahlin (being generous I think)
Say 4% (generous again) catch the train which is approx 1,000 people. Ticket price $5.

Does a 700million dollar loan at 5% costing $35,000,000 a year plus the rail running loss and running costs of this sound feasible in the least?

LABOR AND THE GREENS HAVE LOST THE PLOT. UNBELIEVABLE!!

At the end of the day I’m sure people would rather have jobs than to have a tram they can’t afford to catch.

What are the expected ticket prices of the Tram?
Given that ACTION currently makes about a $100 million dollar a year loss, how much loss is a tram going to do?
Given its a PPP what is the government’s share of the loss? are they promising a return on investment?

Why start in Gungahlin? That only leaves one/two options to extend.. A central tram would be able to used by more people in Canberra and have more options for extension.

Why down the middle of Northbourne?

What impact on traffic during construction/ after. Wouldn’t a 5 minute delay for many people completely out do the CBA.

Where is the latest ACTION mywaydata data to say what the expected patronage is?
Giving a rough estimate when there is that much data is questionable.

Where are the door to door surveys asking if people in the area’s will actually use light rail?

How come we have a final cost of 610 million when we haven’t even gone to tender yet?

Are they going to source from Australia and keep the money local or go overseas to save a buck and screw up the economy?

Why is there no draft plan of the rest of the network or even a first possible extension?

How many carparks are likely to go and from where? is it likely to be more than the number of people expected to come via tram?

What will lightrail do that traffic light pre-emption and bus networks wont?

HiddenDragon said :

puggy said :

Yeah, people are missing the point. Capital Metro has little to do with finding a solution to a current transport problem. It’s about land development and engineering the capital toward a certain “preferred” design. It’s why Northbourne is going to be redeveloped the whole way along, it’s why there are six story apartment blocks going up on Flemington and a Woolies moving into Franklin.

That corridor is going to be of such a high density that the tram will be the only way to move (aside from the trusty bicycle of course). Flemington is only half done, if that, and it already takes a while to get down to Well Station Drive heading into the city during peak.

And don’t get me started on parking in that area, or litter, or shopping trolleys…. Actually, that reminds me, off to FixMyStreet I go!

That’s an interesting perspective, and it would be nice to think that market forces – or the best approximation of such in a highly regulated town like this – might pay for the tram, but a cold view of reality, and past experience, would suggest otherwise. It’s shaping up to be like something out of eastern bloc Europe, with a tacky, expensive makeover, coming to Northbourne Avenue and parts thereabout – “Glory To Our Potatoes!” (or should that be Truffles?).

Love it. “Turnip Train”? Katie’s TYPHI? TPAIH !

HiddenDragon6:25 pm 17 Sep 14

puggy said :

Yeah, people are missing the point. Capital Metro has little to do with finding a solution to a current transport problem. It’s about land development and engineering the capital toward a certain “preferred” design. It’s why Northbourne is going to be redeveloped the whole way along, it’s why there are six story apartment blocks going up on Flemington and a Woolies moving into Franklin.

That corridor is going to be of such a high density that the tram will be the only way to move (aside from the trusty bicycle of course). Flemington is only half done, if that, and it already takes a while to get down to Well Station Drive heading into the city during peak.

And don’t get me started on parking in that area, or litter, or shopping trolleys…. Actually, that reminds me, off to FixMyStreet I go!

That’s an interesting perspective, and it would be nice to think that market forces – or the best approximation of such in a highly regulated town like this – might pay for the tram, but a cold view of reality, and past experience, would suggest otherwise. It’s shaping up to be like something out of eastern bloc Europe, with a tacky, expensive makeover, coming to Northbourne Avenue and parts thereabout – “Glory To Our Potatoes!” (or should that be Truffles?).

wildturkeycanoe6:23 pm 17 Sep 14

I had a listen to Minister Corbell this morning on the radio, replying to written questions from Facebook. Sure, it is easy to answer questions when the person asking cannot elaborate or re-direct because the answer wasn’t a proper one in response. One I heard was the cost of the tram ride. Apparently Minister Corbell thinks it will be in line with our current bus system. Does this mean our bus fares are going to increase substantially to align with the new tram fares, so that we can pay back all these hundreds of millions of dollars? If not, I suspect that it will take an awful lot of time to pay off all this borrowed money. Future governments and future rate payers are in for an awfully horrible time.
As for the excuse for using Gungahlin first because it is a growth area, bollocks. According to this – http://www.cmd.act.gov.au/__data/assets/pdf_file/0007/119734/suburb-population-projection.pdf, the Gungahlin area will only have 55,000 inhabitants in 2019, next to Belconnen with 94,000 and Tuggeranong with 88,000. Sure, it might be a growth area but actual figures show that more people would benefit in other areas. Also, if one were to catch our bus network to get to Civic before 9:00am, it takes roughly the same time via bus from Gordon in the south, Macgregor in the west and Ngunnawal in the north. Why does the newest suburb, who gets the newest everything else, deserve the newest transport alternative that could move more people from a more densely populated area?

watto23 said :

Ben_Dover said :

Total cost – 783 million dollars. Construction will begin in 2016 with service expected to begin in 2019/20.

Yeah sure, I have a bridge you may wish to consider buying, to go with the light rail.

If we vote in Labour again after this farce we deserve all we get.

To be fair, people voted them in knowing they were going to build it, unlike the federal election where most of whats been done was not known. I think it will take a miracle for a majority liberal or Labor government in Canberra, so unless PUP gains grip in Canberra greens will still probably hold the balance of power.

To be accurate, Liberal and Labor won the same number of seats and while it is of no consequence, the Liberals received more votes than Labor. The Greens did not promise anything as they are never likely to be governing in a majority but Labor did make general statements about committing to light rail but it will be shown in the future that they really didn’t intend it to happen.
One of the favourite statements that politicians use is “we are committed to this and that etc.” which means nothing.
The Greens were massacred electorally and Labor are only using their vote for minority rule while continuing “the commitment” story.
If I recall correctly, the mantra up until this week was to have the Capital Metro project “approved to investment” stage only. Somehow, there has been a great leap forward to “go the whole hog” now but in reality, it is still only “a commitment”.

If the tram doesn’t run at a loss, then I couldn’t care less where they build it from/to/between.

But, on the reasonable assumption that it will, like most do, run at a loss, what I as a resident, Ratepayer and voter in the ACT demand to see is a clear statement from the ACT Gov’t on what impact meeting or subsidising any loss will have on the ACT Gov’t budget and how meeting that will increase all our Annual Rates (remember – the potential trippling of Annual Rates is supposed to be “Revenue Neutral” as it will only replace stamp duty forgone) & other ACT Gov’t charges.

Though the cost isn’t yet known, there is absolutely no reason why the ACT Gov’t can not say right now that if the tram runs, for example at a M$50 loss pa, Annual Rates and other Gov’t charges will increase by x % or x $ to cover that cost. Then for M$100 loss pa, etc.

If not, then what is the “opportunity cost” ie. what ACT Gov’t services will be reduced to meet that loss from within the existing budget.

They must know – if they don’t, then ploughing ahead with the tram fiscal and economic madness.

ACT residents and Ratepayers deserve to be told this in the interests of openness, honesty and to inform public opinion.

Ben_Dover said :

Total cost – 783 million dollars. Construction will begin in 2016 with service expected to begin in 2019/20.

Yeah sure, I have a bridge you may wish to consider buying, to go with the light rail.

If we vote in Labour again after this farce we deserve all we get.

To be fair, people voted them in knowing they were going to build it, unlike the federal election where most of whats been done was not known. I think it will take a miracle for a majority liberal or Labor government in Canberra, so unless PUP gains grip in Canberra greens will still probably hold the balance of power.

Yeah, people are missing the point. Capital Metro has little to do with finding a solution to a current transport problem. It’s about land development and engineering the capital toward a certain “preferred” design. It’s why Northbourne is going to be redeveloped the whole way along, it’s why there are six story apartment blocks going up on Flemington and a Woolies moving into Franklin.

That corridor is going to be of such a high density that the tram will be the only way to move (aside from the trusty bicycle of course). Flemington is only half done, if that, and it already takes a while to get down to Well Station Drive heading into the city during peak.

And don’t get me started on parking in that area, or litter, or shopping trolleys…. Actually, that reminds me, off to FixMyStreet I go!

dkNigs said :

I actually think the funny thing that will happen here, Gunghalin link is started, then the scare mongers from south of the lake kick Labor out, is the fact those claiming they need it more, south of the lake, will never see it under the Liberals.

It has to bloody start somewhere, and everyone thinks they should get it first. Starting in a growing area makes the most sense.

(1) It doesn’t have to “start” anywhere. That is the whole point. It shouldn’t start at all – at least not at this point in time.

(2) I don’t recall anyone saying that it should “start” south of the Lake. Rather, there is widespread disbelief that it will ever extend south of the Lake.

switch said :

dungfungus said :

From all reports I have seen, the general Tuggeranong community isn’t saying “me too”.
They recognise that the Action buses already provide a good public transport service (commensurate with demand) JUST THE SAME AS WHAT ACTION ARE ALREADY PROVIDING TO AND FROM GUNGAHLIN.
This is the folly of the Capital Metro project – they are duplicating an existing, adequate public transport system that can increase capacity overnight without adding expensive infrastructure. Buses will also always be more flexible and adaptable than trams.
The real transport corridor congestion in Canberra is Canberra Avenue between Fyshwick and Queanbeyan. This has been recognised by Minister Rattenbury by the widening of some sections of Canberra Avenue to improve bus access and reduce transit times.
What has been ignored is the underutilised rail line from Bungendore to Kingston.
.
.
.

+1 dungers. I’m not going to waste space by quoting it all and then saying +1, or “me too.” But I demand to know from our elected, especially the Green, WHY this most sensible option is never acted upon or even mentioned? It’s all there, it’s even full of recycled goodness!

There are also old station sites at Tuggeranong and Hume.

Good point about the recycling.
I was very impressed when The Greens (I think it was Minister Rattenbury’s sole initiative) recycled the old pedestrian bridge linking Lathlain Street to Belconnen Mall by placing it over the washaway gap on the bicycle/pedestrian track adjacent to the Duntroon entrance. The cost was ridiculously high but “value for money” isn’t what The Greens are about.
A disused rail line does exist next to Hume, Tralee and (old) Tuggeranong indeed. It would be delightful if the developers at Tralee could activate a rail service before the Gunghalin light rail is operational. Mr Barr wouldn’t be happy.

There seems to be a misconception among some light rail advocates that light rail critics are pro-car and anti-public transport. That inferred generalisation is incorrect.

I know that more alternatives to cars need to be opened up. However, that does not mean that I condone gross inefficiency.
I’ve read a number of bus vs tram debates, and have looked at Rapid Bus Transit systems, and I do not see the pros of trams outweighing the pros of dedicated bus systems. Moreover, dedicated lanes for buses down the centre of Northbourne would not require the expensive excavation and re-laying of underground cables. I have no idea how light rail plans to jump LBG, but it would be cheap to dedicate an existing lane to buses.

Sure it’s nice to have a ride on a tram system retained in a city where once they were the limits of public transport technology. But transport technology no longer depends solely on rails. It just makes no sense to install a dated system that depends entirely on an embedded track remaining clear. If you want a dedicated way, you can still have that with a bus down the centre of Northbourne. You can still have your platforms and level entry, as per Trans Milenio Bogota, and roll your bike or wheel chair on board. A bus can turn off the dedicated way and circumvent problems. A tram can’t. The route is locked in for a tram. Routes can be adapted and revised for buses. Requisition an existing lane on trunk roads as you see fit and send a strong message about transport priorities. As for environmental concerns, hybrid electric buses exist, and upgrade to cleaner cheaper electric buses as they roll out.

Could the whole of Canberra have received a reinvigorated public transport spine for the cost of a light rail from Civic to Gunghalin?

Public transport isn’t within practical distance for me, so I will won’t benefit from it as much as other rate payers irrespective of where the expenditure focus is, but I encourage it.

Ben_Dover said :

So, how many people live within walking distance of a tram stop sufficiently far out of civic, to make it worthwhile catching the tram?

How many of these people, work within walking distance of the terminus or inner city stops of the tram?

How many people would be willing to catch a bus to a tram stop, catch a tram, and then catch a bus from their tram stop to their workplace?

How many already catch one or more busses from the areas serviced by the tram into city for work?

Why are we having this very expensive tram, to service a few dozen, probably less than a hundred, people who will be wanting or willing to use it?

Why not buy them an electric car each, it would be cheaper.

I’d be happy with that 😀 I could use it.. currently I don’t use the buses because for my partner and I it’s actually cheaper for us to drive than both catch a bus.

We do however live and work somewhere that would both be covered by the light rail.. that being said neither of us want it and would prefer better buses instead.

Ben_Dover said :

So, how many people live within walking distance of a tram stop sufficiently far out of civic, to make it worthwhile catching the tram?

How many of these people, work within walking distance of the terminus or inner city stops of the tram?

How many people would be willing to catch a bus to a tram stop, catch a tram, and then catch a bus from their tram stop to their workplace?

How many already catch one or more busses from the areas serviced by the tram into city for work?

Why are we having this very expensive tram, to service a few dozen, probably less than a hundred, people who will be wanting or willing to use it?

Why not buy them an electric car each, it would be cheaper.

“Why not buy them an electric car each, it would be cheaper.”
And the infrastructure (courtesy of the Actew/Better Place unfulfilled vision), is in place.
Just do it!

dungfungus said :

From all reports I have seen, the general Tuggeranong community isn’t saying “me too”.
They recognise that the Action buses already provide a good public transport service (commensurate with demand) JUST THE SAME AS WHAT ACTION ARE ALREADY PROVIDING TO AND FROM GUNGAHLIN.
This is the folly of the Capital Metro project – they are duplicating an existing, adequate public transport system that can increase capacity overnight without adding expensive infrastructure. Buses will also always be more flexible and adaptable than trams.
The real transport corridor congestion in Canberra is Canberra Avenue between Fyshwick and Queanbeyan. This has been recognised by Minister Rattenbury by the widening of some sections of Canberra Avenue to improve bus access and reduce transit times.
What has been ignored is the underutilised rail line from Bungendore to Kingston.
.
.
.

+1 dungers. I’m not going to waste space by quoting it all and then saying +1, or “me too.” But I demand to know from our elected, especially the Green, WHY this most sensible option is never acted upon or even mentioned? It’s all there, it’s even full of recycled goodness!

There are also old station sites at Tuggeranong and Hume.

So, how many people live within walking distance of a tram stop sufficiently far out of civic, to make it worthwhile catching the tram?

How many of these people, work within walking distance of the terminus or inner city stops of the tram?

How many people would be willing to catch a bus to a tram stop, catch a tram, and then catch a bus from their tram stop to their workplace?

How many already catch one or more busses from the areas serviced by the tram into city for work?

Why are we having this very expensive tram, to service a few dozen, probably less than a hundred, people who will be wanting or willing to use it?

Why not buy them an electric car each, it would be cheaper.

dungfungus said :

dkNigs said :

I actually think the funny thing that will happen here, Gunghalin link is started, then the scare mongers from south of the lake kick Labor out, is the fact those claiming they need it more, south of the lake, will never see it under the Liberals.

It has to bloody start somewhere, and everyone thinks they should get it first. Starting in a growing area makes the most sense.

From all reports I have seen, the general Tuggeranong community isn’t saying “me too”.
They recognise that the Action buses already provide a good public transport service (commensurate with demand) JUST THE SAME AS WHAT ACTION ARE ALREADY PROVIDING TO AND FROM GUNGAHLIN.
This is the folly of the Capital Metro project – they are duplicating an existing, adequate public transport system that can increase capacity overnight without adding expensive infrastructure. Buses will also always be more flexible and adaptable than trams.
The real transport corridor congestion in Canberra is Canberra Avenue between Fyshwick and Queanbeyan. This has been recognised by Minister Rattenbury by the widening of some sections of Canberra Avenue to improve bus access and reduce transit times.
What has been ignored is the underutilised rail line from Bungendore to Kingston.
It would only cost a few million dollars to implement a regional rail service (diesel powered without the expensive wirescape) from Bungendore to Kingston via HQJOC and Fyshwick. Action buses could then distribute the commuters to interchanges via the Parliamentary Triangle.
Add some practical vision and a light rail line could be built from Fyshwick to the airport precinct and then onto Civic via Russell and the new Consitution Avenue thereby allowing the occupants of 10,000 cars that travel daily from the region east of Canberra into Canberra, an environmentally sound travel alternative which will save them a lot of stress and money for parking.
It could all be funded by the sale of the land where the current Kingston railway yards are (this is already planned) and relocating the railway station and buses to Canberra airport. The interstate buses currently using the Jolimont Centre could re-locate to Canberra airport to make it a true transport hub with air, rail and road travel access all together. This would also add to the case for a VFT to terminate at the Canberra airport and reduce the need for large interstate buses to travel in and out of Civic.
If the aforementioned rail line from Bungendore to Canberra isn’t utilised more it may be abandoned. Using a regional commuter rail service to link regional NSW to Canberra is one way we can preserve the rail line. Do we really want to see it converted to a bicycle path as has been done in Newcastle?.
This would need the ACT Government to liaise with their NSW counterparts through the existing MOU for regional development. There seems to be no problem in negotiating the medicinal cannabis deal with NSW so the goodwill and cooperation should be easily extended.
Do any commuters from the east see this as viable?
While it mat be too late to consider this proposal as an alternative to the Capital Metro one, it should be instead considered as an imperative as a way to reduce the number of cars coming into Canberra every day. I always thought The Greens hated cars anyhow.

I neglected to include Queanbeyan as a stop on the route from Bungendore to Kingston.
Both Queanbeyan and Bungendore railway stations already have existing areas suitable for “park and ride”.

dkNigs said :

I actually think the funny thing that will happen here, Gunghalin link is started, then the scare mongers from south of the lake kick Labor out, is the fact those claiming they need it more, south of the lake, will never see it under the Liberals.

It has to bloody start somewhere, and everyone thinks they should get it first. Starting in a growing area makes the most sense.

From all reports I have seen, the general Tuggeranong community isn’t saying “me too”.
They recognise that the Action buses already provide a good public transport service (commensurate with demand) JUST THE SAME AS WHAT ACTION ARE ALREADY PROVIDING TO AND FROM GUNGAHLIN.
This is the folly of the Capital Metro project – they are duplicating an existing, adequate public transport system that can increase capacity overnight without adding expensive infrastructure. Buses will also always be more flexible and adaptable than trams.
The real transport corridor congestion in Canberra is Canberra Avenue between Fyshwick and Queanbeyan. This has been recognised by Minister Rattenbury by the widening of some sections of Canberra Avenue to improve bus access and reduce transit times.
What has been ignored is the underutilised rail line from Bungendore to Kingston.
It would only cost a few million dollars to implement a regional rail service (diesel powered without the expensive wirescape) from Bungendore to Kingston via HQJOC and Fyshwick. Action buses could then distribute the commuters to interchanges via the Parliamentary Triangle.
Add some practical vision and a light rail line could be built from Fyshwick to the airport precinct and then onto Civic via Russell and the new Consitution Avenue thereby allowing the occupants of 10,000 cars that travel daily from the region east of Canberra into Canberra, an environmentally sound travel alternative which will save them a lot of stress and money for parking.
It could all be funded by the sale of the land where the current Kingston railway yards are (this is already planned) and relocating the railway station and buses to Canberra airport. The interstate buses currently using the Jolimont Centre could re-locate to Canberra airport to make it a true transport hub with air, rail and road travel access all together. This would also add to the case for a VFT to terminate at the Canberra airport and reduce the need for large interstate buses to travel in and out of Civic.
If the aforementioned rail line from Bungendore to Canberra isn’t utilised more it may be abandoned. Using a regional commuter rail service to link regional NSW to Canberra is one way we can preserve the rail line. Do we really want to see it converted to a bicycle path as has been done in Newcastle?.
This would need the ACT Government to liaise with their NSW counterparts through the existing MOU for regional development. There seems to be no problem in negotiating the medicinal cannabis deal with NSW so the goodwill and cooperation should be easily extended.
Do any commuters from the east see this as viable?
While it mat be too late to consider this proposal as an alternative to the Capital Metro one, it should be instead considered as an imperative as a way to reduce the number of cars coming into Canberra every day. I always thought The Greens hated cars anyhow.

dkNigs said :

I actually think the funny thing that will happen here, Gunghalin link is started, then the scare mongers from south of the lake kick Labor out, is the fact those claiming they need it more, south of the lake, will never see it under the Liberals.

It has to bloody start somewhere, and everyone thinks they should get it first. Starting in a growing area makes the most sense.

I think this thread suggests that no one wants it first and we’d prefer an improved bus system..

That being said, I live in Gungahlin and I’d be more than happy for the south to take it.

I actually think the funny thing that will happen here, Gunghalin link is started, then the scare mongers from south of the lake kick Labor out, is the fact those claiming they need it more, south of the lake, will never see it under the Liberals.

It has to bloody start somewhere, and everyone thinks they should get it first. Starting in a growing area makes the most sense.

wildturkeycanoe6:08 am 17 Sep 14

dkNigs said :

TaxedContractor said :

Short sighted, glory seeking idiots…

All those who want to rely more heavily on cars, while whinging there isn’t enough parking in Braddon are the short sighted idiots.

These are probably the folk who don’t live in Gunners, who don’t have suitably timetabled bus services to get them to and from work and who need a better transport system before anybody else. Unfortunately, everywhere except Gungahlin will suffer when the tram costs blow out, meaning Action buses will probably get their budget screwed down to save money and who loses? Everyone else who will have to resort to driving to work.
Short sightedness, wanting to rely more heavily on cars, hardly the case. If you surveyed the drivers out there, I doubt many of them want to drive to work at all, but are simply forced to do so because of the absence of an alternative. Why pay $50 a week on fuel and another $60 on parking, when your blessed public transit system is so much cheaper? It is because there is no other way that is convenient, accessible or appropriately scheduled for many, many people.
Before being so shortsighted yourself, think about the reasons people drive instead of catching mass transit.

astrojax said :

was thinking same thing… they give themselves away by lacking any actual argument, relying on hackneyed rhetoric instead.

fun to watch, isn’t it?

The “actual arguments” have been done to death, here and elsewhere, for years now. They include:

– no proper cost-benefit analysis has been undertaken for light rail
– insufficient population density along any stretch of the proposed route
– more logical options for reducing congestion have been ignored (eg spending the same money on minimising traffic black spots, or improving ACTION through dedicated busways or trolley buses)
– light rail will replace the most heavily patronised and cost-effective ACTION routes, ie trunk routes between town centres
– the initial $783 million outlay will only cover Gungahlin-Civic.
– light rail travelling down median strips will disrupt traffic flows.
– the high-cost personnel and capital costs of ACTION will be duplicated

If you want hackneyed rhetoric, consider the reasons why we have been told we need light rail:
– people are laughing at Canberra and we need light rail to show that we’re a real city like Melbourne or Sydney
– the world is going to end if people don’t stop driving cars
– all the car commuters currently ignoring ACTION will magically realise how great light rail is and stop driving their cars
– “just build it”
– Europe does it, so it must be great

what is a tired unit in the Pines worth? What will it be worth on 2020? I am contemplating unit banking!

dkNigs said :

TaxedContractor said :

Short sighted, glory seeking idiots…

All those who want to rely more heavily on cars, while whinging there isn’t enough parking in Braddon are the short sighted idiots.

Can you please write the rest of us a cheque for 3-6 billion to connect ourselves to Braddon?

I’m not a Lib staffer and I think the light rail project has no merit that could not be achieved better and cheaper with buses. I think the govt is getting a bit paranoid if they think comments from Canberrans who are against light rail must be evil staffers.

justin heywood6:47 pm 16 Sep 14

astrojax said :

Bosworth said :

There are a lot of Liberal Party staffers in this thread.

was thinking same thing… they give themselves away by lacking any actual argument, relying on hackneyed rhetoric instead.

fun to watch, isn’t it?

Yeah, I certainly haven’t seen any arguments about light rail on this board.

HiddenDragon6:39 pm 16 Sep 14

We used to have the NCDC, now we have the NCMC – North Canberra Municipal Council – running the town, and this epic fiscal catastrophe will surely be their crowning glory. It will be a serious burden for ACT taxpayers long after the current passing players have left public life (hopefully much sooner than later) and in some cases, after said individuals have left Canberra. When it is all boiled down, the case for this indulgence amounts to a particular “vision” (wishful thinking), and glib arguments against greater reliance on buses – which offer far greater flexibility and responsiveness, and less disruption, than trams ever can.

The recent announcement about ACT Government support for dealing with the Mr Fluffy problem (an initiative which I broadly support) spoke volumes about decision making by our local government. The public explanation for the re-ordering, already, of priorities in the very recent budget was along the lines that Mr Fluffy was not “on the radar”, even when the local budget was re-worked in light of the (shock, horror, who could’ve guessed it’d be tough) federal budget – really? oh really? The “she’ll be right”, “besides, the bills won’t come in until much later”, approach to the northside tramline is all of a piece with this, and it would be way too much to expect that the same people would now be thinking seriously about the implications for the ACT Budget of Australia’s shaky, and quickly declining, terms of trade.

All of that said, I’ll endorse Postalgeek’s wise comment at 12.41 and say that it would nice to be proven wrong (but doubt very, very much if that will happen).

astrojax said :

Bosworth said :

There are a lot of Liberal Party staffers in this thread.

was thinking same thing… they give themselves away by lacking any actual argument, relying on hackneyed rhetoric instead.

fun to watch, isn’t it?

Looks like it’s far too easy to brush aside valid concerns by claiming they are from Liberal party staffers, supporters, etc.

In my case, I am a life long Labor voter – for more elections than I care to remember now. For the 1st time in my life, at the last ACT election I did not vote Labor. Why ? 3 reasons mainly (i) the (then proposed) Light Rail project, (ii) potential tripling of Annual Rates and Federally (iii) because of the Rudd/Gillard/Rudd carry on.

Both at the ACT level and Federally, i thought that both Labor Gov’t were a hopeless mess. Nothing has changed my view on that – indeed, the decision by ACT Labor to plough ahead with the Light Rail vindicates that decision.

It has been said that Oppositions do not win Government – incumbant Governments loose elections. Check out the abilities of the current Federal Gov’t to see that proven. In which case – goodbye Katy, Andrew, Simon, Shane, etc. I hope a new incoming ACT Gov’t learns from your obvious mistakes – if ACT voters/Ratepayers arn’t so apathetic, disconnected and overpaid to care of course !

astrojax said :

Bosworth said :

There are a lot of Liberal Party staffers in this thread.

was thinking same thing… they give themselves away by lacking any actual argument, relying on hackneyed rhetoric instead.

fun to watch, isn’t it?

Care to nominate any; and what should their argument?

Well sorry, ‘Chortle’ here but just with the noisy bit. Not the gleeful bit.

Oh dear. Has anyone come across comments from interstate about our tram thingy. Wasn’t there overspends with a similar thing in Qld? There must be some chortling somewhere , other than here.

OpenYourMind5:40 pm 16 Sep 14

astrojax said :

Bosworth said :

There are a lot of Liberal Party staffers in this thread.

was thinking same thing… they give themselves away by lacking any actual argument, relying on hackneyed rhetoric instead.

fun to watch, isn’t it?

Well it’s worse than that for me. I voted Labor, so I’m partly responsible for this terrible situation we are in. I took the Libs triple our rate as a bit of a scare campaign, but now I’m realising they were probably correct.

And if you think these arguments lack substance, you are wrong. Pointing out a potential (likely) billion dollar plus infrastructure project with arguably little merit for the majority of inhabitants of a relatively small city. It’s not complicated. No matter which way you cut it, light rail is crap.

If the buses, which go everyone, cause a mountain of red ink, what do you think a Gunghalin-City train’s books are going to look like?

It’s us rate payers that will be shafted.

TaxedContractor said :

Short sighted, glory seeking idiots…

All those who want to rely more heavily on cars, while whinging there isn’t enough parking in Braddon are the short sighted idiots.

TaxedContractor4:38 pm 16 Sep 14

http://www.canberratimes.com.au/act-news/act-chief-minister-katy-gallagher-draws-a-line-in-the-sand-on-cost-of-gungahlin-tram-project-20140610-zs2xw.html#ixzz3DSQ5Hq3a

Chief Minister Katy Gallagher has drawn a line in the sand on the Gungahlin tram project, saying cabinet will not support a cost substantially beyond $614 million, adjusted for today’s dollars.

Going on that conversion rate it would seem that we will be paying for this unwanted lemon long after it has joined the Sydney Monorail.

And I doubt that the $783 Million includes the money so far blown on the feasibility studies.

Who needs the Federal Gov’ts current efforts in wiping out Canberra when we have our own glorified council doing the job for them. Short sighted, glory seeking idiots…

Bosworth said :

There are a lot of Liberal Party staffers in this thread.

was thinking same thing… they give themselves away by lacking any actual argument, relying on hackneyed rhetoric instead.

fun to watch, isn’t it?

rommeldog56 said :

Kalliste said :

🙁 All I see in my future is massive road works down Flemington and Northbourne making it to be even more frustrating to drive down every morning than it already is.

Considering construction starts in the next election year, what are the odds it could be stopped before it begins?

I’m sure that this hopeless, inept minority Labor ACT Gov’t will ensure that contracts are signed before the next election (in 2016 I think ?). Once that is done, it will probably be next to impossible to pull out.

Isn’t that what happened to the Sydney Monorail, and why they ended up with a useless loop? If they couldn’t stop it, they’d make it as useless as possible. Gotta love Liberals.

Wow! Poetry reading by flash mob on the trams in Phoenix!
This is a cert. for Canberra trams. I can hardly wait.
http://downtowndevil.com/2014/09/15/60480/literary-flash-mob-light-rail/

Not voting Labor is hardly an alternative in the ACT. You would just be replacing the current clowns with even worse ones.

I’d love to see the business case, I’m sure it is a fine piece of fantasy fiction.

I will be amazed if it ends up costing less than a billion.

Bosworth said :

There are a lot of Liberal Party staffers in this thread.

Let me guess who is one of them.
Damien Haas?

There’s nothin’ on earth like a genuine bona-fide electrified six-car monorail!

Just another reason not to Labor again (the other being they closed my local school).

2604 said :

Like any sane Canberran, I am dismayed by this decision.

The Greens deserve our contempt because this project smacks of their juvenile approach to governance. They always demand the theoretical best solution to everything, irrespective of how great the cost to the community, or how minor the benefit.

Labor deserves our contempt because, once again, they have put the interests of their union paymasters ahead of the interests of the population whose interests they are elected and paid to represent. The hideously overpaid ACTION workforce of drivers, mechanics and ancilliary staff will need to be duplicated to staff the light rail. A huge payday for the TWU, who no doubt had some say in the decision to proceed with this project.

Most of all, ACT voters deserve our contempt. No matter how fiscally irresponsible Labor is, no matter how egregious the annual increases in rates, fees and charges are, no matter how many pie-in-the-sky ideas Labor comes up with and implements (badly), ACT people keep voting for them. Honestly, Labor could run an election ticket in the ACT featuring Adolf Hitler, Idi Amin and Pol Pot and still romp it in, because most Canberrans developed an aversion to the Liberals whilst undergraduate university students and haven’t have the brains or maturity to re-examine that position since.

Well said re ACT voters. ACT Labor/Greens were voted in at the last election with full visability that of policies that included :(a) building a light rail at min m$614 cost, and (b) up to tripling of Annual Rates (claiming that it will be “revenue neutral” !). The ACT can not afford a Government such as this !

The ning nong apathetic ACT Ratepayers/voters now have got what they voted for – and deserve. Will they learn ? Sadly, probably not.

Kalliste said :

🙁 All I see in my future is massive road works down Flemington and Northbourne making it to be even more frustrating to drive down every morning than it already is.

Considering construction starts in the next election year, what are the odds it could be stopped before it begins?

I’m sure that this hopeless, inept minority Labor ACT Gov’t will ensure that contracts are signed before the next election (in 2016 I think ?). Once that is done, it will probably be next to impossible to pull out.

The only way of sending a message to subsequent ACT Govt’s that this is not the sort of sensible decision making or fiscal management that ACT Ratepayers expect, is to vote them out at the next election. This mob are well and truely past their use by date…….

Bring it on. More mass transit, less single-occupant car trips.

It’ll never happen.
Abbott will commondeer the rails to be melted down for battleships to save our soveriegn borders.

I’m pro-light rail, but not in this proposal, because all it does is replace buses, with trams and doesn’t improve transit times significantly for the cost.

I’d rather see a rapidbus system than a slow light rail/tram system. So it will still take just as long to get anywhere from Gungahlin to civic, so I can’t see the benefit. While I agree trams are nicer than buses in general, its not worth the cost.

We needed a rapid inter city public transport system. Gungahlin to the City should be at max a 10 minute trip. Tuggeranong to the City a 20 minute trip. Car users drive for the convenience and they pay for it. This proposal will not be convenient and will not convince anyone to use it over a car.

wildturkeycanoe11:52 am 16 Sep 14

There goes the savings from the carbon tax repeal, all $220 of it, into our future rates for a white elephant that moves about as quick as a gray one.

What odds are the bookies offering on it being finished before 2030? I’d like a ten buck punt that it will not be.

There are a lot of Liberal Party staffers in this thread.

Total cost – 783 million dollars. Construction will begin in 2016 with service expected to begin in 2019/20.

Yeah sure, I have a bridge you may wish to consider buying, to go with the light rail.

If we vote in Labour again after this farce we deserve all we get.

Kalliste said :

🙁 All I see in my future is massive road works down Flemington and Northbourne making it to be even more frustrating to drive down every morning than it already is.

Considering construction starts in the next election year, what are the odds it could be stopped before it begins?

There are a couple of “sleepers” (bad pun I know) that will “derail” (sorry again!) the whole project.
Overriding that, when Canberrans find out how much the annual PPP subsidies will be for the next 20 years, and find out it will be subsided by further rate increases, then Labor will realize the folly of the whole thing proceeding will cost them the next two elections.

🙁 All I see in my future is massive road works down Flemington and Northbourne making it to be even more frustrating to drive down every morning than it already is.

Considering construction starts in the next election year, what are the odds it could be stopped before it begins?

Masquara said :

Polls please, Riotact!

It would be very interesting to see a poll asking which Canberrans had rather put off – a new convention centre or light rail – to fund dealing with the asbestos knock-down-&-rebuild.

A new convention centre is not needed. When was the last time the current convention centre had a full house for a convention?
The asbestos problem falls under the heading “bad luck”. It is totally out of order to sort this one out using taxpayers’ money.
The timing of the light rail go ahead announcement conveniently masks the major problems we have with our hospitals and this is where the money needs to be spent.

Postalgeek said :

I hope this project proves the critics wrong (myself included) and is a great success, now that we are tied to it. A smug I-told-you-so will do little to recoup costs. But I can’t help but have my doubts; unlike buses, when a tram breaks down, that’s the end of the line , and everyone will have to use the bus system that hasn’t had $700 million spent on it.

http://www.smh.com.au/nsw/light-rail-breakdown-closes-line-between-central-and-lilyfield-20140909-10e7oz.html

This is not the first breakdown problem on this new light rail extension using the refurbished CAF trams.
I wonder if the Capital metro project includes the costing for a light rail recovery engine as, if a tram breaks down, there won’t be enough passengers on board to push it to the next station.

rosscoact said :

Great day! An excellent project endorsed by the majority of Canberrans

How can you say that?
It’s preposterous to say “the majority” of Canberrans support the project.
Where is any proof that points to that?.

Great day! An excellent project endorsed by the majority of Canberrans

I hope this project proves the critics wrong (myself included) and is a great success, now that we are tied to it. A smug I-told-you-so will do little to recoup costs. But I can’t help but have my doubts; unlike buses, when a tram breaks down, that’s the end of the line , and everyone will have to use the bus system that hasn’t had $700 million spent on it.

http://www.smh.com.au/nsw/light-rail-breakdown-closes-line-between-central-and-lilyfield-20140909-10e7oz.html

Masquara said :

haroldbeagle said :

>>>Total cost – 783 million dollars.
>>>Construction will begin in 2016 with service expected to begin in 2019/20.

If this governmen’ts past performances, and the performance of pretty much every other recent light rail project around the planet is anything to go by, we should expect the final cost to be close to 2 billion, with a finish date sometime in the 2030’s, and only go as far as Dickson. Or am I being to optimistic?

All players, all parties, should be required to disclose their property purchase dealings anywhere within a walk of this rail corridor in the past decade. And anyone who owns such should be excluded from any light rail decision-making or dealings. Surely.

I will wager now that between now and 2016, the planned route of the light rail will somehow go to the UC campus and all the massive taxpayer funded investment going in there. Very little of it has anything to do with education, by the way.

Let’s hope that, before the Government builds the tramway, it:

1. allows the Canberra community to examine and debate the business case (which it plans to publish at the end of October).

2. considers the advantages of having some express services; and

3. considers whether it should (a) permanently entrench the current dangerous and disfunctional layout of Northbourne Avenue by running the tramway between the two carriageways, or (b) take the safer and more efficient option of building the rails along the western side and moving the northbound road carriageway closer to the southbound carriageway.

Like any sane Canberran, I am dismayed by this decision.

The Greens deserve our contempt because this project smacks of their juvenile approach to governance. They always demand the theoretical best solution to everything, irrespective of how great the cost to the community, or how minor the benefit.

Labor deserves our contempt because, once again, they have put the interests of their union paymasters ahead of the interests of the population whose interests they are elected and paid to represent. The hideously overpaid ACTION workforce of drivers, mechanics and ancilliary staff will need to be duplicated to staff the light rail. A huge payday for the TWU, who no doubt had some say in the decision to proceed with this project.

Most of all, ACT voters deserve our contempt. No matter how fiscally irresponsible Labor is, no matter how egregious the annual increases in rates, fees and charges are, no matter how many pie-in-the-sky ideas Labor comes up with and implements (badly), ACT people keep voting for them. Honestly, Labor could run an election ticket in the ACT featuring Adolf Hitler, Idi Amin and Pol Pot and still romp it in, because most Canberrans developed an aversion to the Liberals whilst undergraduate university students and haven’t have the brains or maturity to re-examine that position since.

“the sale of surface car parks”

Should scare the majority of Canberra.
How many carparks given that light rail only helps those north of civic?
Or are only those north of the lake allowed in civic?

Nigs we already have ‘solid’ connections between town centres, light rail is a complete waste as it just duplicates buses at twice the price – not that it will ever be extended due to the cost, and the rest of us actually need public transport now not in 5 years time. Besides, the most patronised routes are those that Do Not involve having to connect of transfer (ie Xpresso buses that bypass town centres. The ‘trunk’ design has been a proven fail in Canberra, the only people who support it never use public transport.

So the cost will easily blow out to $1000 million.. (Looks bigger than a billion).

So to connect Belconnen to civic and civic to Woden and Woden to Tuggeranong we’re looking at

$4,000,000,000+

This will likely kill Canberra.

OpenYourMind8:44 pm 15 Sep 14

As an ACT ratepayer, this announcement deeply concerns me. This can’t be true.

Look at the cost per ratepayer, look at the few who will benefit.

Never mind the previously repeated points about technology rendering trams obsolescent. Technology such as telecommuting…all you need is good broadband like areas such as, I don’t know, Gunghalin! Smarter, potentially electric self driving transport is on its way, techology such as capacitor based buses and trams that don’t need ugly wires are being trialled elsewhere.

Then there’s the cost blow outs.

Then there’s the liability this city faces with the asbestos debacle.

We simply won’t have any money left to heat our lake!!!

Never

Finally, lets get this happening. The town centres need solid connection like this, Canberra was designed for light rail, and this will help densification of the town centres. When do the nimbi’s think we should do this? In 10-20 years time when we already needed it and it’ll cost twice as much money? Like the NBN?

Hearing the bleating of “monorail” from the Tuggeranong faithful, but weren’t the Tuggeranong community council calling for the ACT govt to buy them the 30kmph decommissioned monorail from Sydney? It has to start somewhere, and it’ll definitely hit Gungahlin, Belconnen and Woden before Tuggeranong.

haroldbeagle said :

>>>Total cost – 783 million dollars.
>>>Construction will begin in 2016 with service expected to begin in 2019/20.

If this governmen’ts past performances, and the performance of pretty much every other recent light rail project around the planet is anything to go by, we should expect the final cost to be close to 2 billion, with a finish date sometime in the 2030’s, and only go as far as Dickson. Or am I being to optimistic?

All players, all parties, should be required to disclose their property purchase dealings anywhere within a walk of this rail corridor in the past decade. And anyone who owns such should be excluded from any light rail decision-making or dealings. Surely.

Damian Haas, some $163 million is being put aside from our pockets to cover when the public/private partnership cost gets sheeted home to the ratepayer. How do you explain that, other than an admission of cost blowout even before the project starts?

Polls please, Riotact!

It would be very interesting to see a poll asking which Canberrans had rather put off – a new convention centre or light rail – to fund dealing with the asbestos knock-down-&-rebuild.

So the project budget is known, but we don’t have a detailed tender response nor public release of the business case.

I hope that when this ****s up, that Canberra learns to stop being a safe Labor town. It will be an expensive lesson, though.

haroldbeagle7:56 pm 15 Sep 14

>>>Total cost – 783 million dollars.
>>>Construction will begin in 2016 with service expected to begin in 2019/20.

If this governmen’ts past performances, and the performance of pretty much every other recent light rail project around the planet is anything to go by, we should expect the final cost to be close to 2 billion, with a finish date sometime in the 2030’s, and only go as far as Dickson. Or am I being to optimistic?

Holden Caulfield7:45 pm 15 Sep 14

$783 million?

Let’s go for a nearest the pin on the actual final cost.

$1.41 billion is my bid.

That would buy a lot of free bus rides right across Canberra.

Un-f*&$ing-believable.

The stupidest idea ever. Welcome to a new low ACT Labor.

Daily Digest

Want the best Canberra news delivered daily? Every day we package the most popular Riotact stories and send them straight to your inbox. Sign-up now for trusted local news that will never be behind a paywall.

By submitting your email address you are agreeing to Region Group's terms and conditions and privacy policy.