Advertisement

Capital Metro to support more than 3,500 jobs during construction

By 2 June 2014 24

The Capital Metro project will support more than 3,500 jobs during construction and many more into the future according to a report by global firm EY released today.

Minister for the Environment and Sustainable Development, Simon Corbell, said the jobs created by the light rail project that links Gungahlin and the city will provide an immediate boost to the ACT as well as continuing to support the economy well into the future.

“We now have a good indication of the total number of jobs that will be supported by the Capital Metro light rail project and it is a big boost for the ACT,” Mr Corbell said.

“Light rail is well known for its ability to stimulate economies and support significant job numbers both during construction and operation.

“In a time when many jobs will be lost in the ACT, it is great to see the positive economic injection that Capital Metro will have to the ACT economy in the short and long term. This benefit coupled with the increased commercial activity that typically occurs around light rail mean that Capital Metro is poised to deliver a significant boost to the ACT economy.

“Predictably employment requirements for building the light rail are mostly made up of construction and engineering. Some of the highest demand will likely be bricklayers, carpenters, joiners and labourers. But it does not stop there as it is always the case that there will be flow on effects in to areas such as hospitality, retail and other services.”

The EY report shows that light rail along the city to Gungahlin corridor will support 50,000 jobs through to 2047.

“Light Rail will deliver so much more than a transport benefit for Canberra and this is why the ACT Government have been so intent on Canberra planning for the future and delivering city-changing infrastructure.”

The Capital Metro Agency will be engaging with local industry to help connect local talent with opportunities that the project provides.

“While there will always be an element of national or international expertise used, we are very interested in the elements of the project that can be delivered locally through a partnership with a lead contractor.”

(Simon Corbell Media Release)

Please login to post your comments
24 Responses to Capital Metro to support more than 3,500 jobs during construction
#1
miz9:17 am, 02 Jun 14

The Metro Millstone will stop people going to Civic for years to come (forcing many to close) while they are digging up major thoroughfares to lay down tram tracks; whereas a radically improved bus network would actually stimulate the economy, jobs, over ‘corridors’ all over the entire city, at a faster rate, for far less. But I doubt they have crunched THOSE numbers.

Look I love the ‘idea’ of a tram or light rail – sure, it sounds cool – but this govt is mad to think it is viable either economically or on a density basis, even with their purported plan to greatly increase density along the first leg (and of course associated traffic disruption, folks!).

However we DO have buses – lots of them – and the govt could easily make a case to invest more in our buses now that they have beaten the drum on improving public transport. Surely they could start looking into the bus option properly. But they won’t do that while they are acting like zealots.

#2
Rollersk8r10:00 am, 02 Jun 14

I’m no huge fan of Alistair Coe but his Canberra Times article on the weekend was spot on in many ways. This will be the biggest waste of money in Canberra’s history, no exaggeration. The concept is completely insane. There’s all sorts of reasons why it’s a terrible idea – but the most basic one is this: Just how many jam packed trains does there have to be on the line, all returning to Gungahlin empty, to justify both the upfront and ongoing costs??

#3
dungfungus10:08 am, 02 Jun 14

miz said :

The Metro Millstone will stop people going to Civic for years to come (forcing many to close) while they are digging up major thoroughfares to lay down tram tracks; whereas a radically improved bus network would actually stimulate the economy, jobs, over ‘corridors’ all over the entire city, at a faster rate, for far less. But I doubt they have crunched THOSE numbers.

Look I love the ‘idea’ of a tram or light rail – sure, it sounds cool – but this govt is mad to think it is viable either economically or on a density basis, even with their purported plan to greatly increase density along the first leg (and of course associated traffic disruption, folks!).

However we DO have buses – lots of them – and the govt could easily make a case to invest more in our buses now that they have beaten the drum on improving public transport. Surely they could start looking into the bus option properly.

But they won’t do that while they are acting like zealots.

Any attempts to improve public transport in the ACT are subject to approval of the TWU. The Canberra Labor Party is the political wing of the TWU.
We only have to look to Queanbeyan to see how an efficient bus service is run. If this model could be emulated in the ACT then everyone would quickly forget the notion that a light rail will solve the deficiencies of our bus network.

#4
Felix the Cat10:27 am, 02 Jun 14

I can’t see why any Gungahlin residents would drive the 15 mins (or 30 mins bus ride) from Bonner or Forde down to EPIC then jump on a tram for another 15-20 mins journey to Civic and then have to walk another 10-15 mins to get to their office or then have to jump on a bus to go elsewhere.

People that have cars will just continue to drive to work as it quicker and way more convenient than public transport. Those without cars will take buses, which while possibly taking longer as they weave in and out of the various Gungahlin streets and suburbs, will most likely take them closer to their workplace (with the option of continuing to other destintions if they don’t work in Civic, unlike the tram).

Tourists aren’t going to find the trams much use. Not much tourist stuff to see at Mitchell (unless you are into garden supplies, automotive workshops or strip clubs/brothels). Tourists coming from Sydney could stop at EPIC and take the tram to Civic but they would be better of to spend the extra 10 mins driving there so they can then drive to the other tourist places around Canberra that the tram doesn’t go to.

#5
Willoring12:04 pm, 02 Jun 14

I sat next to a member of our local assembly. In justifying the tram, she stated that people hated Action, particularly the attitude of drivers. I asked her why that would be different with a tram. She was surprised – seems she had not thought that the TWU will cover the tram drivers too!
Along with every other thinking person in Canberra (and being an educated society, there are a lot of us), I oppose this ideological waste of money. Although Labor aligned, I will not vote for the Gallagher Government if they continue with this madness. Not looking to vote Liberal – hoping that there will be a no-tram independent I can vote for.

#6
justin heywood12:16 pm, 02 Jun 14

I’ve prepared a bit of a primer for the Light Rail cheerleaders. (Capital Metro, feel free to distribute all the copies you wish)

Objection: Financial numbers (for Light Rail) don’t stack up?
Response: Numbers, shmumbers,. You’re not visionary enough!

Objection: Will only serve a small part of the city whilst pretty much gobbling up the entire transport/infrastructure budget, and then some?
Response: Selfish b*stard! Anyway, someone will build some more lines to the rest of the city, sometime, in the future (snigger).

Objection: An upgraded bus service would be cheaper, be more flexible and is more practical for Canberra’s layout.
Response: You idiot. Buses run on roads, and use fossil fuel that come out of the ground and releases carbon into the atmosphere. But our trams will run on rails, and use electricity, which comes out of…power points. Anyway, if you look at it from a triple bottom line perspective…

Objection: Not enough population density on proposed route?
Response: Okay, we’re the government; we’ll build the bl**dy density too! Then we can say the proposed density will make the proposed demand enormous, and thus we propose that the project will, proposedly, be astoundingly successful. And given the financial and business acumen we’ve demonstrated over the years, why would you doubt us?

Secondary question: But if the density is not there, why do we need the trams?
Response : Well obviously you don’t understand politics. There’s this thing called the balance of power, and it’s REALLY important….

#7
milkman12:47 pm, 02 Jun 14

As a project, light rail will be a total tramwreck.

#8
pajs1:03 pm, 02 Jun 14

I was thinking about being anti-light-rail, but then I realised I’d be agreeing with both Alistair Coe and Dungfungus, so clearly I’d got things wrong.

That space in the middle of Northborne was planned for transit, so let’s get on with it, I reckon.

#9
dungfungus2:00 pm, 02 Jun 14

pajs said :

I was thinking about being anti-light-rail, but then I realised I’d be agreeing with both Alistair Coe and Dungfungus, so clearly I’d got things wrong.

That space in the middle of Northbourne was planned for transit, so let’s get on with it, I reckon.

Damn!
Just when I thought I was getting through to you………………….

#10
wildturkeycanoe2:12 pm, 02 Jun 14

“Some of the highest demand will likely be bricklayers, carpenters, joiners and labourers.”
Are they building a rail network or a house? I would’ve suspected jobs to be in areas such as civil construction, earthworks, electrical signalling and obviously the steel workers laying the track. Who came up with a dumb statement like that? How much joinery is involved in trams?
The vehicles are built elsewhere and brought here, the tram stations will likely be like our bus stops, just glass and aluminium. Bricklayers, would probably be hired to build new housing for the corporate bosses of the new network only. Will the 3500 jobs be local trades or brought in as specialist contractors for the companies building it? It isn’t like we have much experience in building railways here right now do we? I believe these figures are a pie in the sky, just as the cost of the whole system, which is exactly how much? Do they know how much it’s going to sting us yet?

#11
Willoring4:13 pm, 02 Jun 14

pajs said :

I was thinking about being anti-light-rail, but then I realised I’d be agreeing with both Alistair Coe and Dungfungus, so clearly I’d got things wrong.

That space in the middle of Northborne was planned for transit, so let’s get on with it, I reckon.

The NCDC in its wisdom provided the earthworks for many future road duplications (Tuggeranong Parkway, many arterials in Tuggeranong and Belconnen). On your logic, we should build these roads also (after all, the provision is there).
Let’s not confuse the argument with such details as available funds, demand estimates, cost/benefit studies, etc…..

#12
Pandy4:25 pm, 02 Jun 14

wildturkeycanoe said :

“Some of the highest demand will likely be bricklayers, carpenters, joiners and labourers.”
Are they building a rail network or a house? I would’ve suspected jobs to be in areas such as civil construction, earthworks, electrical signalling and obviously the steel workers laying the track. Who came up with a dumb statement like that? How much joinery is involved in trams?
The vehicles are built elsewhere and brought here, the tram stations will likely be like our bus stops, just glass and aluminium. Bricklayers, would probably be hired to build new housing for the corporate bosses of the new network only. Will the 3500 jobs be local trades or brought in as specialist contractors for the companies building it? It isn’t like we have much experience in building railways here right now do we? I believe these figures are a pie in the sky, just as the cost of the whole system, which is exactly how much? Do they know how much it’s going to sting us yet?

At most during construction there will be 500 local jobs. All of the rest will be based in Spain, Canada or China. I am sure that will help the ACT.

#13
bikhet4:28 pm, 02 Jun 14

“The EY report shows that light rail along the city to Gungahlin corridor will support 50,000 jobs through to 2047.”

A couple of obvious obvious questions. How many jobs does it support now, without light rail? How many would it support in 2047 if light rail wasn’t built?

#14
Pandy5:54 pm, 02 Jun 14

bikhet said :

“The EY report shows that light rail along the city to Gungahlin corridor will support 50,000 jobs through to 2047.”

A couple of obvious obvious questions. How many jobs does it support now, without light rail? How many would it support in 2047 if light rail wasn’t built?

How many jobs won’t be there because of the cut backs in the PS and Canberra not being as popular? How many people will be working at home in 2047 considering that the aim is to have 12% of PS by 2020?

#15
HiddenDragon6:05 pm, 02 Jun 14

“Predictably employment requirements for building the light rail are mostly made up of construction and engineering. Some of the highest demand will likely be bricklayers, carpenters, joiners and labourers. But it does not stop there as it is always the case that there will be flow on effects in to areas such as hospitality, retail and other services.”

I imagine this will be tremendously encouraging news for the thousands of white collar public servants whose jobs are disappearing over the next few years, and, of course, the yet higher rates, fees and charges which will be imposed (starting tomorrow) to fund the tramline won’t have any negative effect, at all, on consumer spending in the ACT – so all those hoped-for “flow on effects in to areas such as hospitality, retail and other services” will be net additions to the local economy, wont they…….?

#16
Masquara7:07 pm, 02 Jun 14

Corbell interviewed and spoke only in terms of “unskilled jobs” – no mention of transport or environment outcomes. So there you have it, folks: they’re after a temporary economic fix, and happy to saddle us with a white elephant. Where is Mayor Rattenbury on this by the way? Has there been a peep out of him?

#17
milkman7:40 pm, 02 Jun 14

Masquara said :

Corbell interviewed and spoke only in terms of “unskilled jobs” – no mention of transport or environment outcomes. So there you have it, folks: they’re after a temporary economic fix, and happy to saddle us with a white elephant. Where is Mayor Rattenbury on this by the way? Has there been a peep out of him?

Hope it works out better than the Home Insulation Program…

#18
rommeldog568:33 pm, 02 Jun 14

Rollersk8r said :

I’m no huge fan of Alistair Coe but his Canberra Times article on the weekend was spot on in many ways. This will be the biggest waste of money in Canberra’s history, no exaggeration. The concept is completely insane. There’s all sorts of reasons why it’s a terrible idea – but the most basic one is this: Just how many jam packed trains does there have to be on the line, all returning to Gungahlin empty, to justify both the upfront and ongoing costs??

Yep-spot on. I have little time for Coe and the Cbr Liberals. But on this one, he is 100% correct – it was a good analysis IMHO.

The jobs will be but for a short time – if the $ stays in Canberra. But the bill to be footed by all ACT residents and Ratepayers will go on, and on, and on, forever. So, what happens post the economic stimulus shot in the arm from light rail construction – what comes after that to prop up the ACT economy ??? It’s wing and a prayer stuff……..

#19
haroldbeagle9:19 pm, 02 Jun 14

If anyone wants a preview of what will happen if this goes ahead, have a look at the just (finally) opened trams in Edinburgh:

“In the decade since the first money was allocated to the project, the price has doubled, the network has halved and it has taken twice as long to build as originally planned.”

http://www.bbc.com/news/uk-scotland-27602618

#20
PantsMan10:16 pm, 02 Jun 14

Paying 3,500 people to dig holes would also “create jobs”.

This media release is an admission that the whole Monorail is a financial disaster waiting to happen. The only positive Mr 1909 votes can provide is that some people will get jobs building it. This raises the following questions:

* Are these people usually resident in the ACT, or will they have to be imported from other jurisdictions?

* Is there currently 3 per cent unemployment in the ACT? Will this simply push up the cost of construction?

* Given that there is full employment, which industries will have jobs destroyed to provide labour for the Monorail?

No cashflow or patronage models yet?

A saw the clowns on Stateline ACT who are running this circus, and they are certainly not the cream of the ACT public service (if there is any such thing).

#21
justin heywood11:34 pm, 02 Jun 14

Masquara said :

?….Where is Mayor Rattenbury on this by the way? Has there been a peep out of him?

Good point. In the last few weeks on RiotACT we’ve had Rattenbury, Barr and lesser Labor luminaries being kind enough to give us their thoughts on Federal politics, but here we are with the biggest ACT project since…the GDE, and all of a sudden they’re gone all quiet again, or shy, or embarrassed…

#22
Martyn941:07 am, 03 Jun 14

haroldbeagle said :

If anyone wants a preview of what will happen if this goes ahead, have a look at the just (finally) opened trams in Edinburgh:

“In the decade since the first money was allocated to the project, the price has doubled, the network has halved and it has taken twice as long to build as originally planned.”

http://www.bbc.com/news/uk-scotland-27602618

If you think that’s a preview, you are being optimistic. Even if their tramway has problems, Edinburgh is at least a city: 50 % more population in less than a third the area. Plus more subjective factors – like something worth getting off the tram for at the end of the line.

#23
Masquara7:20 am, 03 Jun 14

justin heywood said :

Masquara said :

?….Where is Mayor Rattenbury on this by the way? Has there been a peep out of him?

Good point. In the last few weeks on RiotACT we’ve had Rattenbury, Barr and lesser Labor luminaries being kind enough to give us their thoughts on Federal politics, but here we are with the biggest ACT project since…the GDE, and all of a sudden they’re gone all quiet again, or shy, or embarrassed…

Perhaps they are officially relying on John Hargreaves as the current voice on ACT Government matters.

#24
dungfungus11:06 am, 03 Jun 14

PantsMan said :

Paying 3,500 people to dig holes would also “create jobs”.

This media release is an admission that the whole Monorail is a financial disaster waiting to happen. The only positive Mr 1909 votes can provide is that some people will get jobs building it. This raises the following questions:

* Are these people usually resident in the ACT, or will they have to be imported from other jurisdictions?

* Is there currently 3 per cent unemployment in the ACT? Will this simply push up the cost of construction?

* Given that there is full employment, which industries will have jobs destroyed to provide labour for the Monorail?

No cashflow or patronage models yet?

A saw the clowns on Stateline ACT who are running this circus, and they are certainly not the cream of the ACT public service (if there is any such thing).

We need a new Canberra convention centre like Custer needed more Indians, also.
Who thinks up all these crazy ideas?

Sponsors
RiotACT Proudly Supports
Advertisement
Copyright © 2014 Riot ACT Holdings Pty Ltd. All rights reserved.