12 April 2019

RiotACT Face Off: A mandate for light rail?

| Charlotte
Join the conversation
146
Corbell vs Coe

Our occasional Face-off series is back to look at one of the most-debated issues around town right now. Plenty of RiotACT readers already have a view on this question, but we decided to give Simon Corbell and Alistair Coe the opportunity to set out their opposing views on what has become a key issue leading into the ACT election later this year:

Does the ACT Government have a mandate to commence construction of its planned light rail network in June?

Simon Corbell, Minister for Capital Metro:

When construction starts on the first stage of light rail in Canberra in June it will be the culmination of nearly four years of work that started with an ACT Labor election commitment prior to the last ACT election.

On 21 September 2012 I stood on Northbourne Avenue with then chief minister Katy Gallagher and made a commitment that if we won the election we would proceed with light rail from Gungahlin to City during our next term.

Our official, publicly released policy document stated that we committed to “establish the ACT’s first large-scale private sector partnership to plan, finance and develop the first stage of a Light Rail Network” with “construction estimated to commence in 2016”.

We provided an estimate for the capital cost of the project, which would be delivered as a PPP and therefore not paid for until after the forward estimates period.

The commitment was clear, we would sign a PPP to start construction in 2016, which is exactly what we are doing.

Any argument to the contrary by the opposition is either mischievous or misinformed.

Meanwhile the Liberals are trying desperately to make this year’s election one about light rail, maybe because they have very little else to offer the people of Canberra.

They ignorantly claim that it is the government’s only priority. In reality the government’s priorities rightly lie in health and education, where we spend more than half of the ACT’s budget every year. In terms of expenditure, light rail is only a small part of the government’s plans. Over the life of the light rail contract, which includes design and construction as well as maintenance and operation for 20 years, the government will spend less than 1 percent of total expenditure on light rail. In the same time we will spend 35 times as much on health and 25 times as much on education.

Alistair Coe, Shadow Minister for Transport:

It’s absolute folly that the ACT Government has a mandate to proceed with light rail before this year’s ACT Election. Prior to the 2012 ACT Election the Labor Party took a $30 million commitment to Canberrans for concept and design work on light rail. That’s all.

The only reason we are in the position we are today, on the cusp of burdening generations of Canberrans with paying back hundreds of millions of dollars for a project that doesn’t stack up, is because after the 2012 Election, Labor slapped together a deal with the sole Greens MLA Shane Rattenbury to build light rail. In return he guaranteed his support for a Labor government.

Since then and with no mandate, the Government has run a spending spree on light rail, not because it’s the best thing for Canberra, but simply to stay in power.

Last week the Labor Party and the Greens confirmed they will hold Canberrans for ransom, by choosing an international consortium to whom Canberra will have a 25-year debt. This is completely unfair and undemocratic. Given how unpopular light rail is in Canberra, the only fair thing for the government to do is take the issue to the 2016 Election. Let Canberrans decide.

This is the biggest infrastructure project in the history of the ACT yet very few will benefit. The Government did not get a mandate to build this project at the 2012 Election, and, we are only months away from the 2016 Election.

Only the Canberra Liberals are giving Canberrans a choice on light rail. The Labor Party and Greens are dictating that it must happen and are preparing to waste hundreds of millions of dollars on their back-room deal.

If you have a suggestion for a Face-off topic or participant, please let us know in the comments below.

Join the conversation

146
All Comments
  • All Comments
  • Website Comments
LatestOldest
OpenYourMind7:28 pm 04 Mar 16

rubaiyat said :

pajs said :

Leon said :

Did the Government wait until after the 2012 election to inform the public that it had found that the extra costs of light rail exceeded its extra benefits by more than $230 million, compared with bus rapid transit?

This information was available in the ACT Government’s August 2012 submission to Infrastructure Australia. I for one did not become aware of it until much later.

Personally, I’d prefer a good network of o-bahn-ish dedicated lanes for bus rapid transport, rather than light rail, but the Libs killed off the Belconnen Busway project and there needs to be consequences for such decisions. Play silly buggers with sensible proposals like that and you reap the consequences of Plan B’s that you might like less. Let’s get the light rail built and have done with it.

Squeezed in a run up the O-Bahn.

It is well patronised as it is the fastest way of getting up the north eastern Adelaide suburbs.

It is quite a bit of engineering, the concrete tracks are elevated off the ground in a fenced off right of way about 60 – 80 metres wide. They have mostly excavated down so the tracks don’t intrude too much although the noise must be considerable for a lot of the neighbourhoods where it runs out in the open. It is certainly a noisy teeth rattling ride for the passengers.

It is fast because there are so few stops and it is not using the roads for most of its length. Each of the interchanges have large flanking car parks but don’t seem to attract any commercial developments, except for the rather ugly Westfields at the Tea Tree Plaza terminus, which whilst not as ugly and unpleasant as canberra’s bus terminuses is still pretty grim, and tacked on at the backside of the shops.

The buses are very frequent but as they are heading off in all directions and nothing along the O-Bahn is really a destination or attraction, makes that less useful than would seem at first.

It is purely a mechanical means of getting from outer Adelaide to the CBD. It does nothing beyond that and given the nature of buses I can see no design improvement that would fix that. If it had been the originally planned light rail extension to the Glenelg tram it would have done much more and I suspect would have created neighbourhoods en route.

Curiously one of the objections to the light rail by the public along the route was supposedly the issue of “noise”. Why they chose something noisier remains a mystery.

I also rode the Glenelg tram and didn’t see any of the claimed fare evasion. People were tapping on as required. Seems to be a lot of this in this forum. Claims of crimes, stabbings, diseases and untold (non-existent) horrors to frighten off the impressionable ignorant.

So what you are saying is that you are completely tram eyed. Even when a bus has a dedicated thoroughfare and runs on rails it still isn’t the magic machine a tram is. Can you please assure me you aren’t on the payroll of the tram money machine?? You tell us you have kids at grammar and you had a ski lodge, so obviously money is not a big issue, yet you spruik trams every opportunity.

Just out of curiosity, I took the tram on the Gold Coast. It was ok but nothing special and it hadn’t performed any magic around the stations I stopped at – if it was my 1.6billion or whatever, I wouldn’t pay for it. Fortunately it was quiet so we go seats, but I was painfully aware of the few seats and many standing options. For Canberra, the odd peak time a tram would be an unpleasant place to be, and like our buses, the rest of the time it will run unprofitable and empty. Our roads are like that, we have a ‘peak 5minutes’ then transit is clear. It’s been like that for the last 40 odd years – apart from around Gunghalin (bad planning) and Airport (which is fixed up) and Parkes Way (just needs a few design improvements). The only difference is if you are stuck in traffic for a few minutes you at least don’t have someone sneezing all over you (except if you have a small person!).

As for noise, electric is almost certain, be it buses, trams or cars. Better still, take a look at capacitor buses – they are new tech and still a little expensive but already make the tram wires look like a nasty and unnecessary addition to our fair city.

pajs said :

Leon said :

Did the Government wait until after the 2012 election to inform the public that it had found that the extra costs of light rail exceeded its extra benefits by more than $230 million, compared with bus rapid transit?

This information was available in the ACT Government’s August 2012 submission to Infrastructure Australia. I for one did not become aware of it until much later.

Personally, I’d prefer a good network of o-bahn-ish dedicated lanes for bus rapid transport, rather than light rail, but the Libs killed off the Belconnen Busway project and there needs to be consequences for such decisions. Play silly buggers with sensible proposals like that and you reap the consequences of Plan B’s that you might like less. Let’s get the light rail built and have done with it.

Squeezed in a run up the O-Bahn.

It is well patronised as it is the fastest way of getting up the north eastern Adelaide suburbs.

It is quite a bit of engineering, the concrete tracks are elevated off the ground in a fenced off right of way about 60 – 80 metres wide. They have mostly excavated down so the tracks don’t intrude too much although the noise must be considerable for a lot of the neighbourhoods where it runs out in the open. It is certainly a noisy teeth rattling ride for the passengers.

It is fast because there are so few stops and it is not using the roads for most of its length. Each of the interchanges have large flanking car parks but don’t seem to attract any commercial developments, except for the rather ugly Westfields at the Tea Tree Plaza terminus, which whilst not as ugly and unpleasant as canberra’s bus terminuses is still pretty grim, and tacked on at the backside of the shops.

The buses are very frequent but as they are heading off in all directions and nothing along the O-Bahn is really a destination or attraction, makes that less useful than would seem at first.

It is purely a mechanical means of getting from outer Adelaide to the CBD. It does nothing beyond that and given the nature of buses I can see no design improvement that would fix that. If it had been the originally planned light rail extension to the Glenelg tram it would have done much more and I suspect would have created neighbourhoods en route.

Curiously one of the objections to the light rail by the public along the route was supposedly the issue of “noise”. Why they chose something noisier remains a mystery.

I also rode the Glenelg tram and didn’t see any of the claimed fare evasion. People were tapping on as required. Seems to be a lot of this in this forum. Claims of crimes, stabbings, diseases and untold (non-existent) horrors to frighten off the impressionable ignorant.

From across the Pacific Ocean in Austin Texas another Capital Metro is having falling passenger numbers too:
http://www.austinmonitor.com/stories/2016/02/raise-for-watson-as-cap-metro-ridership-is-in-reverse/
There are so many negative variables for public transport in cities like Austin where private transport is a preferable option (like Canberra).

Arthur Davies3:36 pm 18 Feb 16

rubaiyat said :

JC said :

The CAF Urbos 3 is an off the shelf modular design, like all light rail vehicles these days, well except the Melbourne E class but Melbourne is happy to pay double so they can say designed and built in Melbourne.

And boy do they say it! They have huge signs on the sides of many of the Trams.

The battery driven design is now integral to the CAF Urbos as I understand from their specs. You simply tick the box and pay for the extra if you want.

I am not sure though if they have the underground recharging solution that some of the other systems have. As the tram moves over a tram stop it makes contact with a charge point under the chassis.

btw I had a look at the Bourke Street Mall tracks and they are as you describe the Sydney tracks. The steel tracks are bedded in a rubber compound in the paving, making what is already quiet even quieter, which is why they have to run the ads warning the pedestrians to pay attention when crisscrossing the tracks, but then Melbournians have been doing this for a very long time and the extraordinary safety record of their system shows that overall it all works, extremely well.

Nobody dares cross roads filled with cars the way they do the streets serviced with trams.

Electric battery buses are also available with automatic recharging at stops too, a Melbourne built one has the current record for range at over 1000km, Melb to Syd. Guess how many electric buses the Govt is buying in this round of replacements. Buses are faster & far cheaper than trams & can be renewable electric too.

JC said :

The CAF Urbos 3 is an off the shelf modular design, like all light rail vehicles these days, well except the Melbourne E class but Melbourne is happy to pay double so they can say designed and built in Melbourne.

And boy do they say it! They have huge signs on the sides of many of the Trams.

The battery driven design is now integral to the CAF Urbos as I understand from their specs. You simply tick the box and pay for the extra if you want.

I am not sure though if they have the underground recharging solution that some of the other systems have. As the tram moves over a tram stop it makes contact with a charge point under the chassis.

btw I had a look at the Bourke Street Mall tracks and they are as you describe the Sydney tracks. The steel tracks are bedded in a rubber compound in the paving, making what is already quiet even quieter, which is why they have to run the ads warning the pedestrians to pay attention when crisscrossing the tracks, but then Melbournians have been doing this for a very long time and the extraordinary safety record of their system shows that overall it all works, extremely well.

Nobody dares cross roads filled with cars the way they do the streets serviced with trams.

Arthur Davies said :

rubaiyat said :

Please can we stop the ludicrous claims of an ACT “narrow tax base”?

Unlike every other government in Australia, the ACT has an extremely broad range of income sources from rates, GST, Stamp Duty, service and parking charges, penalties and above all land sales in the only jurisdiction that owns and leases, NOT sells the land.

Also stop the totally unfounded claims of inevitable bankruptcy which is not shared by any sane person on this planet, nor any of the financial ratings companies which rate the ACT AAA. Those claims are frankly libellous, or would be if anyone outside a small knitting circle of OAPs in Tuggeranong believed them.

http://www.canberratimes.com.au/act-news/standard-and-poors-retain-aaa-credit-rating-for-canberra-20150925-gjuyto.html

Most of the rise in debt is due to the Mr Fluffy buy back which is an arch example of the public liabilities resulting from environmental damage caused by frankly stupid private corporate and consumer behaviour.

The Queensland Government is facing similar environmental blackmail over the looming Townsville Nickel refinery tailings dam disaster.

http://www.afr.com/business/mining/clive-palmers-qld-nickel-cut-287m-set-aside-to-clean-up-toxic-sludge-20160118-gm8pt6

Qld Nickel has cut $287 million from its environmental obligations despite the estimated $1.4 billion cost to cleanup and somehow, no-one knows how, stop all the poisons in the dams flowing out into the Great Barrier Reef.

A typical bill delivered to the taxpayer after all the “Job Creating” hype has turned into a foul, abandoned, liability.

We are only beginning to get a taste of the astronomic liabilities we are facing for over two hundred years of burning fossil fuels and ongoing environmental damage. Still continuing because of the small minded ignorance and short term thinking of politicians and some members of the public who wrongly associate pollution with economic activity and prosperity.

This is a very common fallacy, not only does the ACT have a narrower tax base than the states, we have a huge tapeworm sucking up our resources & contributing next to nothing, the Federal Govt. It is assumed that the Commonwealth Grants Commission compensates us for all budgetary issues, but it does not.

We have funds going both ways, generally in our favour, for the interstate use of our schools & hospitals etc. The Feds make an “exgratia” payment for rates, but if you look at Parliament, Asio by the lake, & all the other Commonwealth properties they really do not add up. Even worse they pay no payroll tax, stamp duty, etc. The states don’t pay these either but the Feds are around 50% of our economic activity but only around 5 to 6% in the states (census & stats). So we are huge losers by comparison.

Until the Feds pay up & we get rid of our tapeworm we will always have too little money to run our economy properly. I find it very interesting that the Assembly politicians have never taken up this issue. I remember soon after we resoundingly voted against “Self Govt” but got it anyway, a reporter asked the then Grants Commissioner what he would do about the Feds not paying tax & the resulting disadvantage to the ACT. The answer was “this issue has been specifically precluded from my terms of reference”. Maybe some assembly members would like to enlighten us on what they are doing about it.

Oddly enough we agree on most of those points. The Feds shafted Canberra Citizens when they forced self government on the A.C.T. which of course was why they did it.

I recommend we start a Secessionist Party and threaten to make the Parliamentary Triangle the equivalent of Vatican City, cutting off services to anything inside it.

Secession, or the threat of, has frequently worked for the aggrieved. Examples such as Western Australia and Scotland spring to mind. The Confederate States of America not so much. Which raises another lateral thought, based on the success of the Czechs getting rid of the Slovaks, can we encourage Tuggeranong to in turn secede from us?

dungfungus said :

wildturkeycanoe said :

rubaiyat said :

ungruntled said :

Arthur Davies said :

wildturkeycanoe said :

rubaiyat said :

A few questions from the floor:

1. What will 13,000 Prius or Teslas cost?

2. How many Northbourne Avenues have you got in mind for them to drive on?

3. What do you do with the enormous number of vehicles for the 95% of the day that they are doing nothing?

4. Is this more than just a thought bubble?

13,000 sub $50k electric cars would only cost 650 million dollars, but they aren’t being funded by the ratepayer now are they? These would be privately purchased and paid for, giving money to our major lenders on the way. Where will the tram money come from? Everybody’s pockets in Canberra.

We still only need one Northbourne Avenue, because there is also a GDE and Majura Parkway for people to use to get beyond Civic. If they made the speed limit a bit faster, timed the lights better and made the left lane a “Bus Only” lane with more services, I’m sure the congestion problems will not be as bad as they are now.

What do you do with the empty trams that have to run every 6 minutes even when nobody is on them? Now that is a waste of energy, money and continues to add to congestion problems unnecessarily. The 13,000 electric cars will be quietly recharging for their trip home, to pick up the kids, to go shopping and whatever the owners want them to do with the additional benefit of the freedom to go anywhere the owner wants to, not just the confines of Gungahlin.

Mark Ellis’ thought bubble has infinitely more wisdom than the Labor/Green’s 19th century solution. While we are at it, we might as well bring back the horse and carriage, it’ll be just as fast as the tram, uses no electricity or fossil fuels and definitely will make Canberra different to every other major city in the world.

You are quite right regarding the efficiency of off peak lightly loaded trams, the efficiency is woeful unless the tram is full (of largely standing) passengers, lower than an i c car let alone an electric one. But the problem is congestion not efficiency.

History shows us that the electric tram was developed in the late 1800s not to solve a transport problem but to get ride of pollution back then. Around 1900 Melbourne had to get rid of 500T per DAY of manure, as well as the odd dead horse. They had transport, walking (hailed by many as a great health benefit) or on horseback, cart, or carriage. The tram was designed to get rid of manure & it did so very effectively until it in turn was superseded by faster & more effective transport modes (except in 2 out of 25 cities with trams back then). At least the pollution now does not stick to your boots!

Why are we promised a system that solved a problem 130 years ago that no longer exists? The Govt admits publicly that it did not investigate all the available transport options but chose trams essentially as a guess & as they also again openly admit “to drive redevelopment along Northbourne Av”.

Well said Arthur. Why are we getting a 130 yer old solution to a problem we no longer have & no consideration of the problem we do have?

Yeah what is it with those 207 year old internal combustions? Why are we still polluting like there’s no tomorrow? Frankly I blame the Education System, or at least those who slept through it!

Why are we also still burning coal, paying through the nose for cheaper, more abundant locally and more environmentally friendly alternatives such as natural gas? It is about money for the government. Without petrol guzzling cars on our roads, there will be less fuel excise. The government makes $27billion a year on fuel taxes, of which only 25% goes back into roads. The rest goes to general revenue. Until you can find an alternative revenue source, you cannot get rid of cars.
Unfortunately the government is now looking at taxing people with solar installations, to encourage them to disconnect from the grid and use battery storage. I cannot understand this mentality, whereby they are getting this energy from rooftops cheaply but want to discourage more of it. Driving cheap supply away is counterproductive, but it is all probably based on their requirement for a certain component of electricity needing to come from coal power to retain a minimum regular purchase of coal to keep the price cheap.
See, it is all about the dollar, not the environment. Ditching coal power will not become a reality until governments find a way to tax everything else to compensate.

I don’t know why you say natural gas is a cheaper energy source that coal because that is simply not correct.

Whilst you are correct to say that coal is cheaper to buy, that is only because it is free to pollute. If the power utilities had to pay to pollute then they’d rapidly stop dealing in the stuff. We were getting there before the the Mad Monk lied his way into power.

Our pollution was heading down, the power utilities were moving away from coal and the Government had a good stream of income from the sin tax on pollution. Many people moved to solar heating and solar power to the point where the economics have tipped dramatically in favor of renewables.

wildturkeycanoe said :

rubaiyat said :

ungruntled said :

Arthur Davies said :

wildturkeycanoe said :

rubaiyat said :

A few questions from the floor:

1. What will 13,000 Prius or Teslas cost?

2. How many Northbourne Avenues have you got in mind for them to drive on?

3. What do you do with the enormous number of vehicles for the 95% of the day that they are doing nothing?

4. Is this more than just a thought bubble?

13,000 sub $50k electric cars would only cost 650 million dollars, but they aren’t being funded by the ratepayer now are they? These would be privately purchased and paid for, giving money to our major lenders on the way. Where will the tram money come from? Everybody’s pockets in Canberra.

We still only need one Northbourne Avenue, because there is also a GDE and Majura Parkway for people to use to get beyond Civic. If they made the speed limit a bit faster, timed the lights better and made the left lane a “Bus Only” lane with more services, I’m sure the congestion problems will not be as bad as they are now.

What do you do with the empty trams that have to run every 6 minutes even when nobody is on them? Now that is a waste of energy, money and continues to add to congestion problems unnecessarily. The 13,000 electric cars will be quietly recharging for their trip home, to pick up the kids, to go shopping and whatever the owners want them to do with the additional benefit of the freedom to go anywhere the owner wants to, not just the confines of Gungahlin.

Mark Ellis’ thought bubble has infinitely more wisdom than the Labor/Green’s 19th century solution. While we are at it, we might as well bring back the horse and carriage, it’ll be just as fast as the tram, uses no electricity or fossil fuels and definitely will make Canberra different to every other major city in the world.

You are quite right regarding the efficiency of off peak lightly loaded trams, the efficiency is woeful unless the tram is full (of largely standing) passengers, lower than an i c car let alone an electric one. But the problem is congestion not efficiency.

History shows us that the electric tram was developed in the late 1800s not to solve a transport problem but to get ride of pollution back then. Around 1900 Melbourne had to get rid of 500T per DAY of manure, as well as the odd dead horse. They had transport, walking (hailed by many as a great health benefit) or on horseback, cart, or carriage. The tram was designed to get rid of manure & it did so very effectively until it in turn was superseded by faster & more effective transport modes (except in 2 out of 25 cities with trams back then). At least the pollution now does not stick to your boots!

Why are we promised a system that solved a problem 130 years ago that no longer exists? The Govt admits publicly that it did not investigate all the available transport options but chose trams essentially as a guess & as they also again openly admit “to drive redevelopment along Northbourne Av”.

Well said Arthur. Why are we getting a 130 yer old solution to a problem we no longer have & no consideration of the problem we do have?

Yeah what is it with those 207 year old internal combustions? Why are we still polluting like there’s no tomorrow? Frankly I blame the Education System, or at least those who slept through it!

Why are we also still burning coal, paying through the nose for cheaper, more abundant locally and more environmentally friendly alternatives such as natural gas? It is about money for the government. Without petrol guzzling cars on our roads, there will be less fuel excise. The government makes $27billion a year on fuel taxes, of which only 25% goes back into roads. The rest goes to general revenue. Until you can find an alternative revenue source, you cannot get rid of cars.
Unfortunately the government is now looking at taxing people with solar installations, to encourage them to disconnect from the grid and use battery storage. I cannot understand this mentality, whereby they are getting this energy from rooftops cheaply but want to discourage more of it. Driving cheap supply away is counterproductive, but it is all probably based on their requirement for a certain component of electricity needing to come from coal power to retain a minimum regular purchase of coal to keep the price cheap.
See, it is all about the dollar, not the environment. Ditching coal power will not become a reality until governments find a way to tax everything else to compensate.

I don’t know why you say natural gas is a cheaper energy source that coal because that is simply not correct.

Charlotte Harper said :

Have you ever driven along Northbourne to Gungahlin in peak hour, dungfungus?

Yes, I have and I don’t find it much different to driving along it at any time except in the early hours of the morning.
And it has been the same for many years.
There are a few “pinch points” that could be eliminated to improve things but that is the same on most main arterial roads in Canberra.The light rail appears to be more important.

wildturkeycanoe7:17 am 18 Feb 16

rubaiyat said :

ungruntled said :

Arthur Davies said :

wildturkeycanoe said :

rubaiyat said :

A few questions from the floor:

1. What will 13,000 Prius or Teslas cost?

2. How many Northbourne Avenues have you got in mind for them to drive on?

3. What do you do with the enormous number of vehicles for the 95% of the day that they are doing nothing?

4. Is this more than just a thought bubble?

13,000 sub $50k electric cars would only cost 650 million dollars, but they aren’t being funded by the ratepayer now are they? These would be privately purchased and paid for, giving money to our major lenders on the way. Where will the tram money come from? Everybody’s pockets in Canberra.

We still only need one Northbourne Avenue, because there is also a GDE and Majura Parkway for people to use to get beyond Civic. If they made the speed limit a bit faster, timed the lights better and made the left lane a “Bus Only” lane with more services, I’m sure the congestion problems will not be as bad as they are now.

What do you do with the empty trams that have to run every 6 minutes even when nobody is on them? Now that is a waste of energy, money and continues to add to congestion problems unnecessarily. The 13,000 electric cars will be quietly recharging for their trip home, to pick up the kids, to go shopping and whatever the owners want them to do with the additional benefit of the freedom to go anywhere the owner wants to, not just the confines of Gungahlin.

Mark Ellis’ thought bubble has infinitely more wisdom than the Labor/Green’s 19th century solution. While we are at it, we might as well bring back the horse and carriage, it’ll be just as fast as the tram, uses no electricity or fossil fuels and definitely will make Canberra different to every other major city in the world.

You are quite right regarding the efficiency of off peak lightly loaded trams, the efficiency is woeful unless the tram is full (of largely standing) passengers, lower than an i c car let alone an electric one. But the problem is congestion not efficiency.

History shows us that the electric tram was developed in the late 1800s not to solve a transport problem but to get ride of pollution back then. Around 1900 Melbourne had to get rid of 500T per DAY of manure, as well as the odd dead horse. They had transport, walking (hailed by many as a great health benefit) or on horseback, cart, or carriage. The tram was designed to get rid of manure & it did so very effectively until it in turn was superseded by faster & more effective transport modes (except in 2 out of 25 cities with trams back then). At least the pollution now does not stick to your boots!

Why are we promised a system that solved a problem 130 years ago that no longer exists? The Govt admits publicly that it did not investigate all the available transport options but chose trams essentially as a guess & as they also again openly admit “to drive redevelopment along Northbourne Av”.

Well said Arthur. Why are we getting a 130 yer old solution to a problem we no longer have & no consideration of the problem we do have?

Yeah what is it with those 207 year old internal combustions? Why are we still polluting like there’s no tomorrow? Frankly I blame the Education System, or at least those who slept through it!

Why are we also still burning coal, paying through the nose for cheaper, more abundant locally and more environmentally friendly alternatives such as natural gas? It is about money for the government. Without petrol guzzling cars on our roads, there will be less fuel excise. The government makes $27billion a year on fuel taxes, of which only 25% goes back into roads. The rest goes to general revenue. Until you can find an alternative revenue source, you cannot get rid of cars.
Unfortunately the government is now looking at taxing people with solar installations, to encourage them to disconnect from the grid and use battery storage. I cannot understand this mentality, whereby they are getting this energy from rooftops cheaply but want to discourage more of it. Driving cheap supply away is counterproductive, but it is all probably based on their requirement for a certain component of electricity needing to come from coal power to retain a minimum regular purchase of coal to keep the price cheap.
See, it is all about the dollar, not the environment. Ditching coal power will not become a reality until governments find a way to tax everything else to compensate.

Nilrem said :

rommeldog56 said :

Congestion……. ?????

The Gov’t own environmental impact statement stated that the tram will increase congestion because of the infill and densification along the route.

Now, on 2CC it has been announced that new traffic lights will be installed along the Tram route (including Northborne Ave) to give priority to the Tram. That’s going to further increase congestion, not reduce it.

And the congestion would be even worse in the future without the light rail, so what’s your point?

I disagree. It makes no difference to congestion per se if people are on the existing buses they take already, or on the future tram; we would save an enormous amount of PT money which could be used to improve bus services in other areas as well, which would save on congestion in those areasl; and we would NOT have the horrible congestion that is going to happen when half of Northbourne is getting ripped up.

Arthur Davies3:21 pm 17 Feb 16

rubaiyat said :

Please can we stop the ludicrous claims of an ACT “narrow tax base”?

Unlike every other government in Australia, the ACT has an extremely broad range of income sources from rates, GST, Stamp Duty, service and parking charges, penalties and above all land sales in the only jurisdiction that owns and leases, NOT sells the land.

Also stop the totally unfounded claims of inevitable bankruptcy which is not shared by any sane person on this planet, nor any of the financial ratings companies which rate the ACT AAA. Those claims are frankly libellous, or would be if anyone outside a small knitting circle of OAPs in Tuggeranong believed them.

http://www.canberratimes.com.au/act-news/standard-and-poors-retain-aaa-credit-rating-for-canberra-20150925-gjuyto.html

Most of the rise in debt is due to the Mr Fluffy buy back which is an arch example of the public liabilities resulting from environmental damage caused by frankly stupid private corporate and consumer behaviour.

The Queensland Government is facing similar environmental blackmail over the looming Townsville Nickel refinery tailings dam disaster.

http://www.afr.com/business/mining/clive-palmers-qld-nickel-cut-287m-set-aside-to-clean-up-toxic-sludge-20160118-gm8pt6

Qld Nickel has cut $287 million from its environmental obligations despite the estimated $1.4 billion cost to cleanup and somehow, no-one knows how, stop all the poisons in the dams flowing out into the Great Barrier Reef.

A typical bill delivered to the taxpayer after all the “Job Creating” hype has turned into a foul, abandoned, liability.

We are only beginning to get a taste of the astronomic liabilities we are facing for over two hundred years of burning fossil fuels and ongoing environmental damage. Still continuing because of the small minded ignorance and short term thinking of politicians and some members of the public who wrongly associate pollution with economic activity and prosperity.

This is a very common fallacy, not only does the ACT have a narrower tax base than the states, we have a huge tapeworm sucking up our resources & contributing next to nothing, the Federal Govt. It is assumed that the Commonwealth Grants Commission compensates us for all budgetary issues, but it does not.

We have funds going both ways, generally in our favour, for the interstate use of our schools & hospitals etc. The Feds make an “exgratia” payment for rates, but if you look at Parliament, Asio by the lake, & all the other Commonwealth properties they really do not add up. Even worse they pay no payroll tax, stamp duty, etc. The states don’t pay these either but the Feds are around 50% of our economic activity but only around 5 to 6% in the states (census & stats). So we are huge losers by comparison.

Until the Feds pay up & we get rid of our tapeworm we will always have too little money to run our economy properly. I find it very interesting that the Assembly politicians have never taken up this issue. I remember soon after we resoundingly voted against “Self Govt” but got it anyway, a reporter asked the then Grants Commissioner what he would do about the Feds not paying tax & the resulting disadvantage to the ACT. The answer was “this issue has been specifically precluded from my terms of reference”. Maybe some assembly members would like to enlighten us on what they are doing about it.

dungfungus said :

More evidence that Canberra should be getting catenary free trams.
Perhaps they are but they are saving the big announcement until just before the track-work starts so as to appease the voters.
http://www.railway-technology.com/news/newscentro-to-upgrade-midland-metro-trams-for-catenary-free-operation-4811078

Unless you go for an underground power solution, catenary free operation can only be done for small sections of tracks. For example through the centre of Birmingham City as per the article you have quoted. The trams still need to go on catenary at some point to recharge the batteries.

Nilrem said :

rommeldog56 said :

Congestion……. ?????

The Gov’t own environmental impact statement stated that the tram will increase congestion because of the infill and densification along the route.

Now, on 2CC it has been announced that new traffic lights will be installed along the Tram route (including Northborne Ave) to give priority to the Tram. That’s going to further increase congestion, not reduce it.

And the congestion would be even worse in the future without the light rail, so what’s your point?

It is really only “congested” on some main roads for 1 1/2 – 2 hrs per day in the mornings & afternoons Monday-Friday and on Saturday mornings. Its just “busy” on those roads during the rest of the daylight hours.

There is probably a time when a more efficient mass public transport system is needed – but its not now.

But then again, the Tram isn’t about public transport or reducing congestion – its about bringing forward development and revenue raising by the ACT labor/Greens Gov’t – dressed up as a congestion buster.

Rather than invest b$1 on Tram stage 1 at this point in time, the ACT Gov’t would be much better off using Ratepayers $ to expand / improve the already loss making ACTION bus network (until the Tram – or some other new technology solution like “pods”, driverless cars, etc, really is needed), improve the Hospital system here from being the worst in the country, by putting more psychologists into primary schools to help head off learning and social issues, by meeting the unfunded liability of ACT public servants, by investing in schemes to widen the employment/revenue raising base, by reducing & eliminating the ACTs budget deficit, hire some decent city planners, etc.

It can be argued that its never a good time to invest in loss making PPPs – but now certainly is not the time for the Tram.

dungfungus said :

JC said :

dungfungus said :

This is interesting:
http://www.railwaygazette.com/news/urban/single-view/view/midland-metro-trams-to-be-converted-for-catenary-free-operation.html
These trams are similar to the ones Canberra is to get so are we getting the new battery ones or the ones with the old super-capictor technology?
Note the batteries have to be replaced every seven years and the cost is not quoted.
This will probably mean no heating or cooling for passengers when they are running on batteries only.

dungfungus said :

This is interesting:
http://www.railwaygazette.com/news/urban/single-view/view/midland-metro-trams-to-be-converted-for-catenary-free-operation.html
These trams are similar to the ones Canberra is to get so are we getting the new battery ones or the ones with the old super-capictor technology?
Note the batteries have to be replaced every seven years and the cost is not quoted.
This will probably mean no heating or cooling for passengers when they are running on batteries only.

If you took the time the read and comprehend the article you will see that Midland Metro said “catenary-free operation had been envisaged when the CAF trams were ordered in 2012, and the contract included provision for retrofitting. ” and that “four more trams have been ordered which will be supplied with batteries already fitted”

So in other words they thought ahead, ordered a tram that could be retrofitted with batteries and are now buying more already fitted with batteries.

So good result. As for Canberra the tram can be retrofitted with batteries, so if the Russell extension gets the nod it is trivial to retrofit, as is the case for Midland Metro.

And PS you still get a/c when running on batteries.

Canberra Metro is doing it also then?
When are you making the announcement?
Get me proof that the batteries will support heating and cooling please.

The CAF Urbos 3 is an off the shelf modular design, like all light rail vehicles these days, well except the Melbourne E class but Melbourne is happy to pay double so they can say designed and built in Melbourne. That means any option can be added later on if you so like. Modular designs allows operator flexibility and helps keep costs down.

As for a/c and heating, how about you prove it won’t run off batteries? Seriously if the tram is designed to run off wire it is designed to run with all systems active including climate control systems.

wildturkeycanoe said :

JC said :

dungfungus said :

This is what happens when governments “plan for the future”.
http://www.9news.com.au/national/2016/02/15/19/31/ghost-trains-operating-on-sydney-south-west-rail-link
Wow! Only 1655 passengers on a “busy” day from 132 services!
And the population density in that area of South Western Sydney is very high.
Also, trains are virtually empty at the weekend. The NSW government will have to wait until the next ice age to see it start to get near use projections.
A total waste of over $2 billion. Thank goodness our Government knows what they are doing.

Can I suggest that you bring up a google earth image of the area and see where the stations are located.

It kind of debunks you theory that the area has high population density. Rabbits and roo’s maybe. It is a line that has been built very much with the future in mind, which is quite refreshing actually. Because the area WILL be home to many many people over the next 10 years. Compare that to say the Hills district which is only now getting a rail line and even then a half baked one.

The link below will help you find the line and the stations.

https://www.google.com.au/maps/@-33.9575382,150.8449626,14z/data=!3m1!1e3

The problem will be how to keep the thing either viable or running until that 10 years is up. How will it be subsidized until it starts to make sense? Forward planning is a great idea but throwing money at a problem that doesn’t exist yet without the revenue to keep it afloat is poor planning. The project will get mothballed and/or the government go into liquidation before there is need for it.

Firstly in Canberra the problem already exists in Canberra.

But as for waiting wait too long and the costs will increase which offsets any running costs by building early. Also let us not forget we are creatures of habit, so best to have transport option in first to establish those habits rather than get people use to car only commuting.

rommeldog56 said :

Congestion……. ?????

The Gov’t own environmental impact statement stated that the tram will increase congestion because of the infill and densification along the route.

Now, on 2CC it has been announced that new traffic lights will be installed along the Tram route (including Northborne Ave) to give priority to the Tram. That’s going to further increase congestion, not reduce it.

And Infrastructure Australia today just has discovered that there will be congestion from unsupportable increases in traffic.

See today’s Canberra Times. Now that Abbott is gone the muzzle is off.

ungruntled said :

Arthur Davies said :

wildturkeycanoe said :

rubaiyat said :

A few questions from the floor:

1. What will 13,000 Prius or Teslas cost?

2. How many Northbourne Avenues have you got in mind for them to drive on?

3. What do you do with the enormous number of vehicles for the 95% of the day that they are doing nothing?

4. Is this more than just a thought bubble?

13,000 sub $50k electric cars would only cost 650 million dollars, but they aren’t being funded by the ratepayer now are they? These would be privately purchased and paid for, giving money to our major lenders on the way. Where will the tram money come from? Everybody’s pockets in Canberra.

We still only need one Northbourne Avenue, because there is also a GDE and Majura Parkway for people to use to get beyond Civic. If they made the speed limit a bit faster, timed the lights better and made the left lane a “Bus Only” lane with more services, I’m sure the congestion problems will not be as bad as they are now.

What do you do with the empty trams that have to run every 6 minutes even when nobody is on them? Now that is a waste of energy, money and continues to add to congestion problems unnecessarily. The 13,000 electric cars will be quietly recharging for their trip home, to pick up the kids, to go shopping and whatever the owners want them to do with the additional benefit of the freedom to go anywhere the owner wants to, not just the confines of Gungahlin.

Mark Ellis’ thought bubble has infinitely more wisdom than the Labor/Green’s 19th century solution. While we are at it, we might as well bring back the horse and carriage, it’ll be just as fast as the tram, uses no electricity or fossil fuels and definitely will make Canberra different to every other major city in the world.

You are quite right regarding the efficiency of off peak lightly loaded trams, the efficiency is woeful unless the tram is full (of largely standing) passengers, lower than an i c car let alone an electric one. But the problem is congestion not efficiency.

History shows us that the electric tram was developed in the late 1800s not to solve a transport problem but to get ride of pollution back then. Around 1900 Melbourne had to get rid of 500T per DAY of manure, as well as the odd dead horse. They had transport, walking (hailed by many as a great health benefit) or on horseback, cart, or carriage. The tram was designed to get rid of manure & it did so very effectively until it in turn was superseded by faster & more effective transport modes (except in 2 out of 25 cities with trams back then). At least the pollution now does not stick to your boots!

Why are we promised a system that solved a problem 130 years ago that no longer exists? The Govt admits publicly that it did not investigate all the available transport options but chose trams essentially as a guess & as they also again openly admit “to drive redevelopment along Northbourne Av”.

Well said Arthur. Why are we getting a 130 yer old solution to a problem we no longer have & no consideration of the problem we do have?

Yeah what is it with those 207 year old internal combustions? Why are we still polluting like there’s no tomorrow? Frankly I blame the Education System, or at least those who slept through it!

Nilrem said :

rommeldog56 said :

Congestion……. ?????

The Gov’t own environmental impact statement stated that the tram will increase congestion because of the infill and densification along the route.

Now, on 2CC it has been announced that new traffic lights will be installed along the Tram route (including Northborne Ave) to give priority to the Tram. That’s going to further increase congestion, not reduce it.

And the congestion would be even worse in the future without the light rail, so what’s your point?

There is no congestion now, that is the point.

Charlotte Harper7:46 am 18 Feb 16

Have you ever driven along Northbourne to Gungahlin in peak hour, dungfungus?

rommeldog56 said :

Congestion……. ?????

The Gov’t own environmental impact statement stated that the tram will increase congestion because of the infill and densification along the route.

Now, on 2CC it has been announced that new traffic lights will be installed along the Tram route (including Northborne Ave) to give priority to the Tram. That’s going to further increase congestion, not reduce it.

And the congestion would be even worse in the future without the light rail, so what’s your point?

wildturkeycanoe7:34 am 17 Feb 16

JC said :

dungfungus said :

This is what happens when governments “plan for the future”.
http://www.9news.com.au/national/2016/02/15/19/31/ghost-trains-operating-on-sydney-south-west-rail-link
Wow! Only 1655 passengers on a “busy” day from 132 services!
And the population density in that area of South Western Sydney is very high.
Also, trains are virtually empty at the weekend. The NSW government will have to wait until the next ice age to see it start to get near use projections.
A total waste of over $2 billion. Thank goodness our Government knows what they are doing.

Can I suggest that you bring up a google earth image of the area and see where the stations are located.

It kind of debunks you theory that the area has high population density. Rabbits and roo’s maybe. It is a line that has been built very much with the future in mind, which is quite refreshing actually. Because the area WILL be home to many many people over the next 10 years. Compare that to say the Hills district which is only now getting a rail line and even then a half baked one.

The link below will help you find the line and the stations.

https://www.google.com.au/maps/@-33.9575382,150.8449626,14z/data=!3m1!1e3

The problem will be how to keep the thing either viable or running until that 10 years is up. How will it be subsidized until it starts to make sense? Forward planning is a great idea but throwing money at a problem that doesn’t exist yet without the revenue to keep it afloat is poor planning. The project will get mothballed and/or the government go into liquidation before there is need for it.

JC said :

dungfungus said :

This is interesting:
http://www.railwaygazette.com/news/urban/single-view/view/midland-metro-trams-to-be-converted-for-catenary-free-operation.html
These trams are similar to the ones Canberra is to get so are we getting the new battery ones or the ones with the old super-capictor technology?
Note the batteries have to be replaced every seven years and the cost is not quoted.
This will probably mean no heating or cooling for passengers when they are running on batteries only.

dungfungus said :

This is interesting:
http://www.railwaygazette.com/news/urban/single-view/view/midland-metro-trams-to-be-converted-for-catenary-free-operation.html
These trams are similar to the ones Canberra is to get so are we getting the new battery ones or the ones with the old super-capictor technology?
Note the batteries have to be replaced every seven years and the cost is not quoted.
This will probably mean no heating or cooling for passengers when they are running on batteries only.

If you took the time the read and comprehend the article you will see that Midland Metro said “catenary-free operation had been envisaged when the CAF trams were ordered in 2012, and the contract included provision for retrofitting. ” and that “four more trams have been ordered which will be supplied with batteries already fitted”

So in other words they thought ahead, ordered a tram that could be retrofitted with batteries and are now buying more already fitted with batteries.

So good result. As for Canberra the tram can be retrofitted with batteries, so if the Russell extension gets the nod it is trivial to retrofit, as is the case for Midland Metro.

And PS you still get a/c when running on batteries.

Canberra Metro is doing it also then?
When are you making the announcement?
Get me proof that the batteries will support heating and cooling please.

JC said :

dungfungus said :

This is what happens when governments “plan for the future”.
http://www.9news.com.au/national/2016/02/15/19/31/ghost-trains-operating-on-sydney-south-west-rail-link
Wow! Only 1655 passengers on a “busy” day from 132 services!
And the population density in that area of South Western Sydney is very high.
Also, trains are virtually empty at the weekend. The NSW government will have to wait until the next ice age to see it start to get near use projections.
A total waste of over $2 billion. Thank goodness our Government knows what they are doing.

Can I suggest that you bring up a google earth image of the area and see where the stations are located.

It kind of debunks you theory that the area has high population density. Rabbits and roo’s maybe. It is a line that has been built very much with the future in mind, which is quite refreshing actually. Because the area WILL be home to many many people over the next 10 years. Compare that to say the Hills district which is only now getting a rail line and even then a half baked one.

The link below will help you find the line and the stations.

https://www.google.com.au/maps/@-33.9575382,150.8449626,14z/data=!3m1!1e3

You can suggest whatever you like JC.
Perhaps you have forgotten the fact that it is a rail line stopping at 4 stations in 11 km.
While you seem to have and endless supply of tram data at your fingertips (obviously you are in the industry) you seem to know little about passenger commuter trains.

More evidence that Canberra should be getting catenary free trams.
Perhaps they are but they are saving the big announcement until just before the track-work starts so as to appease the voters.
http://www.railway-technology.com/news/newscentro-to-upgrade-midland-metro-trams-for-catenary-free-operation-4811078

OpenYourMind10:26 pm 16 Feb 16

rommeldog56 said :

Congestion……. ?????

The Gov’t own environmental impact statement stated that the tram will increase congestion because of the infill and densification along the route.

Now, on 2CC it has been announced that new traffic lights will be installed along the Tram route (including Northborne Ave) to give priority to the Tram. That’s going to further increase congestion, not reduce it.

Yes, but it will only increase congestion for the 90% of car commuters, so that’s ok.

Canberra is not going to shift its mode of travel. Public transport use is diminishing. A tram to Civic makes no sense for the majority of commuters.

dungfungus said :

This is what happens when governments “plan for the future”.
http://www.9news.com.au/national/2016/02/15/19/31/ghost-trains-operating-on-sydney-south-west-rail-link
Wow! Only 1655 passengers on a “busy” day from 132 services!
And the population density in that area of South Western Sydney is very high.
Also, trains are virtually empty at the weekend. The NSW government will have to wait until the next ice age to see it start to get near use projections.
A total waste of over $2 billion. Thank goodness our Government knows what they are doing.

Can I suggest that you bring up a google earth image of the area and see where the stations are located.

It kind of debunks you theory that the area has high population density. Rabbits and roo’s maybe. It is a line that has been built very much with the future in mind, which is quite refreshing actually. Because the area WILL be home to many many people over the next 10 years. Compare that to say the Hills district which is only now getting a rail line and even then a half baked one.

The link below will help you find the line and the stations.

https://www.google.com.au/maps/@-33.9575382,150.8449626,14z/data=!3m1!1e3

HiddenDragon6:46 pm 16 Feb 16

JC said :

rommeldog56 said :

rubaiyat said :

Please can we stop the ludicrous claims of an ACT “narrow tax base”?

Unlike every other government in Australia, the ACT has an extremely broad range of income sources from rates, GST, Stamp Duty, service and parking charges, penalties and above all land sales in the only jurisdiction that owns and leases, NOT sells the land.

What do u mean “unlike” ? ACT has next to zero royalities from mining for example – unlike rthe States & NT.

The other States also have all the revenue raising sources that you mention. Pluse the ACTs population and commercial/business base is much, much smaller.

Whether ACT land is leasehold or freehold means nothing re revenue.

The ACt is like a teenage child being pushed to “grow up” well before it has a chance to do that in a natural, properly planned way.

And offset for a large part by being essentially a city ‘state’. So no great expenses in supporting remote area schooling, hospitals, police, fire etc etc etc.

And yet we often compare unfavourably with other jurisdictions on per-capita service delivery costs, perhaps due to diseconomies of scale and, at times, the penchant for reinventing policy “wheels” which have been invented and refined elsewhere.

Congestion……. ?????

The Gov’t own environmental impact statement stated that the tram will increase congestion because of the infill and densification along the route.

Now, on 2CC it has been announced that new traffic lights will be installed along the Tram route (including Northborne Ave) to give priority to the Tram. That’s going to further increase congestion, not reduce it.

wildturkeycanoe2:38 pm 16 Feb 16

rubaiyat said :

Cars and roads are extremely obstructive and dangerous in use, but even when they are doing nothing or very little, which is most of the time. They remain dangerous and unpleasant barriers through out the city, impossible barriers when they cut through the landscape. They are a particularly bad fit with residential areas, dangerous for children and the frail, generating enormous amounts of noise and pollution.

Honestly, please explain how a car or a road is dangerous when not in use? You are gripping at straws for the sake of argument now.
How is the tram track any less obstructive than a road? With it’s barrier fences preventing crossing anywhere except at sparsely allocated pedestrian crossing zones, it’ll split Northbourne in half. How much more dangerous is a tram for children who might run out in front, with a stopping distance twice that of a bus and much longer than that of a car with ABS? How much worse for for the elderly who will trip in the channels adjacent the embedded rails, get their walkers stuck in the tracks and the disabled whose wheelchairs will have to bounce up over the rails? Imagine hearing the grinding and squealing every 6 minutes, late into the night, whilst empty carriages do their loop, whilst an occasional Prius or Leaf cruises silently past. I’m sure the imaginary residents of the newly constructed and overpriced apartments adorning this once green entryway to Canberra will miss the peace and quiet of the outer suburbs.

ungruntled said :

farq said :

dungfungus said :

Charlotte Harper said :

But won enough votes to hold the balance of power …

Actually, the Liberals won more votes than Labor or the Greens.
I suppose the fact that the only Green re-elected (one out of four) gave his support to Labor is proof of a resounding victory.

Right on.

I voted Labor in the last election and did not think I was voting for a $700m monorail.

Hang off building it so I (and many others of us) can fix that mistake.

There is a good chance that there will be a change of government, why force them to waste >$20m cancelling it.

The responsible thing to do would be to wait a few months and seek a mandate again at the coming election.

That would be the responsible thing to do, but responsible does not take into account the over-weaning ego of certain Assembly Members who think it is about them! (You whistle & I’ll point at the one who’s pushing it hardest & jumping off the tram before the proverbial hits the fan).

Don’t worry, he’s renewable.

JC said :

dungfungus said :

wildturkeycanoe said :

dungfungus said :

This is interesting:
http://www.railwaygazette.com/news/urban/single-view/view/midland-metro-trams-to-be-converted-for-catenary-free-operation.html
These trams are similar to the ones Canberra is to get so are we getting the new battery ones or the ones with the old super-capictor technology?
Note the batteries have to be replaced every seven years and the cost is not quoted.
This will probably mean no heating or cooling for passengers when they are running on batteries only.

Will that also mean no wi fi?

I think wi-fi is powered remotely but JC would have to adjudicate on that one.
What it means is that if the trams Canberra have ordered are fitted with super-capacitors instead of the new batteries then they will be obsolete before a wheel flange touches a rail.

Again more negativity without thinking. Wireless operation is not a requirement of the first line so they wont have batteries or super capacitors. But the design is capable of retrofitting if need be.

And for what it is worth, WiFi would run off the ancillary supply so would work on batteries. Along with the traction motors, the lights and everything else. This is 2016 afterall, not 1996.

Thanks for that JC. I knew all that but you articulate it much better.

Arthur Davies said :

I am not sure what a “mandate” means in this context. I my books, it is a single decision on a single policy. It surely is not whatever the government chooses to do when it is elected on a grab bag of many policies, some of which some votes are in favour of, others not. Always remember that a Govt gets there by having a large mix of policies which are on balance not quite as bad as the policy mix of those who lost.

There is no way that a govt can claim large scale support for any one policy out of so many (even if they actually did what was policy in all cases after being elected, or am I being confused by “core & non-core”.

To have a genuine iron clad mandate, the single policy would have to be voted on by all electors after FULL disclosure of all the implications, not just financial. I think this is called a referendum. Bring it on if the Govt claims a real mandate. If they will not, what are they afraid of or what are they hiding?

YES ! YES ! YES !

Arthur Davies said :

wildturkeycanoe said :

rubaiyat said :

A few questions from the floor:

1. What will 13,000 Prius or Teslas cost?

2. How many Northbourne Avenues have you got in mind for them to drive on?

3. What do you do with the enormous number of vehicles for the 95% of the day that they are doing nothing?

4. Is this more than just a thought bubble?

13,000 sub $50k electric cars would only cost 650 million dollars, but they aren’t being funded by the ratepayer now are they? These would be privately purchased and paid for, giving money to our major lenders on the way. Where will the tram money come from? Everybody’s pockets in Canberra.

We still only need one Northbourne Avenue, because there is also a GDE and Majura Parkway for people to use to get beyond Civic. If they made the speed limit a bit faster, timed the lights better and made the left lane a “Bus Only” lane with more services, I’m sure the congestion problems will not be as bad as they are now.

What do you do with the empty trams that have to run every 6 minutes even when nobody is on them? Now that is a waste of energy, money and continues to add to congestion problems unnecessarily. The 13,000 electric cars will be quietly recharging for their trip home, to pick up the kids, to go shopping and whatever the owners want them to do with the additional benefit of the freedom to go anywhere the owner wants to, not just the confines of Gungahlin.

Mark Ellis’ thought bubble has infinitely more wisdom than the Labor/Green’s 19th century solution. While we are at it, we might as well bring back the horse and carriage, it’ll be just as fast as the tram, uses no electricity or fossil fuels and definitely will make Canberra different to every other major city in the world.

You are quite right regarding the efficiency of off peak lightly loaded trams, the efficiency is woeful unless the tram is full (of largely standing) passengers, lower than an i c car let alone an electric one. But the problem is congestion not efficiency.

History shows us that the electric tram was developed in the late 1800s not to solve a transport problem but to get ride of pollution back then. Around 1900 Melbourne had to get rid of 500T per DAY of manure, as well as the odd dead horse. They had transport, walking (hailed by many as a great health benefit) or on horseback, cart, or carriage. The tram was designed to get rid of manure & it did so very effectively until it in turn was superseded by faster & more effective transport modes (except in 2 out of 25 cities with trams back then). At least the pollution now does not stick to your boots!

Why are we promised a system that solved a problem 130 years ago that no longer exists? The Govt admits publicly that it did not investigate all the available transport options but chose trams essentially as a guess & as they also again openly admit “to drive redevelopment along Northbourne Av”.

Well said Arthur. Why are we getting a 130 yer old solution to a problem we no longer have & no consideration of the problem we do have?

dungfungus said :

Maybe this would have been a better solution for Canberra. It’s certainty a lot sexier that trams.
http://www.railwaygazette.com/news/news/asia/single-view/view/incheon-airport-maglev-starts-passenger-services.html

Only looks better if you don’t like trees, birds and all the other associated natural life. Did you even notice there was not a tree in sight?

dungfungus said :

This is what happens when governments “plan for the future”.
http://www.9news.com.au/national/2016/02/15/19/31/ghost-trains-operating-on-sydney-south-west-rail-link
Wow! Only 1655 passengers on a “busy” day from 132 services!
And the population density in that area of South Western Sydney is very high.
Also, trains are virtually empty at the weekend. The NSW government will have to wait until the next ice age to see it start to get near use projections.
A total waste of over $2 billion. Thank goodness our Government knows what they are doing.

The developers behind Leppington for some weird reason didn’t actually build the townships where they were supposed to, effectively stranding the stations. Also this is the spur line that will ultimately service Badgery’s Creek Airport when that finally gets up, which it looks like it will but is some way off.

The Leppington Line is just the tail end of the long run through the rest of Sydney which does carry passengers but which the Tabloid media conveniently didn’t show because it didn’t make their story work.

The real tragedy is the awful suburbs on Sydney’s really remote outskirts that are destroying prime agricultural land.

The developers who twisted the government’s arm to have the line built should be made to pay for it.

The “solution” to all of this will be ever higher rates, taxes and charges in the ACT, which will only serve to reinforce our status as a public service company town (hence the latest stern letter from the Chief Minister to the PM), with a private sector which exists predominantly to supply those goods and services which need to be provided locally (rather than purchased online etc.) and with a small niche/boutique technical/creative sector – the latter sometimes outstanding, but never likely to be a significant employer in the broader ACT economy.

Why does “our status as a public service company town” keep being stated as though it were a pejorative.

That is the history of the Australian Capital Territory. That is why this Territory was created. We should be proud of it. Not just in the ACT, but all over Australia.

We were untill we got a federal government who decided that they could save money by bad-mouthing Canberra and straddling it with self government, even though there is no economic base – especially when you consider that Federal Government does not even pay its way at the most basic rates & taxes level, but is an economic millstone round our necks.

It was an irrisponsible act then and is still being paid for by ACT residents. Those who made the decision, however, are living high off the hog. Just look at the politicians of the time & where they are now. Just like Joe Hockey – it’s the “end of the age of entitlement” as he rides off into the sunset with a full parliamentary pension including travel & office staff etc & a new fully paid job in the US with its travel & staff and presumably another pension in due course. That doesn’t count his wife’s house for which he was paid living away from home allowance to rent from her & renting out the garage to another pollie who was being paid living away from home.

But I digress.

miz said :

farq said :

dungfungus said :

Charlotte Harper said :

But won enough votes to hold the balance of power …

Actually, the Liberals won more votes than Labor or the Greens.
I suppose the fact that the only Green re-elected (one out of four) gave his support to Labor is proof of a resounding victory.

Right on.

I voted Labor in the last election and did not think I was voting for a $700m monorail.

Hang off building it so I (and many others of us) can fix that mistake.

There is a good chance that there will be a change of government, why force them to waste >$20m cancelling it.

The responsible thing to do would be to wait a few months and seek a mandate again at the coming election.

It seems strange that the govt is so unquestioning about the light rail, given that they’ve not honoured many of their other commitments with impunity (as noted by others). It’s as if they are afraid of the Green. Just WHAT does that Green have over them? It’s all very unsettling and does not give one confidence that the govt is governing for the electorate. Rather, it seems to be governing solely for one particular ‘special interest’.

YES !!!

farq said :

dungfungus said :

Charlotte Harper said :

But won enough votes to hold the balance of power …

Actually, the Liberals won more votes than Labor or the Greens.
I suppose the fact that the only Green re-elected (one out of four) gave his support to Labor is proof of a resounding victory.

Right on.

I voted Labor in the last election and did not think I was voting for a $700m monorail.

Hang off building it so I (and many others of us) can fix that mistake.

There is a good chance that there will be a change of government, why force them to waste >$20m cancelling it.

The responsible thing to do would be to wait a few months and seek a mandate again at the coming election.

That would be the responsible thing to do, but responsible does not take into account the over-weaning ego of certain Assembly Members who think it is about them! (You whistle & I’ll point at the one who’s pushing it hardest & jumping off the tram before the proverbial hits the fan).

pink little birdie said :

I think that there will be more support for light rail than people currently think. Basically Canberra will have to start light rail/rail transport sometime and somewhere. Starting it now will be cheaper than starting it in a years time or 5 years time.

I’m Canberra born and bred and I have still made the choice to live in walking and cycling distance to work. If there was light rail I would be happy to live along the line and catch it to my work (note I don’t live in Gunghalin and I don’t work in the city). I drive but don’t like driving to work.

Now can I ask you to re-imagine your trip, taking into account these other possible scenarios.

1. On your way to work, you need to drop the 2 year old at day care & the 6 year old at primary school. Of course you do need to pick them up again on the way home!
2. You have physical limitations and are in pain every step you take. (This is not an unusual life to be living)
3. On your way home, you need to call in to the shop to pick up the salad to complete dinner – the local shop has been closed for some time, as the big supermarkets have forced the closure of the small neighbourhood shops.
4. On the way home, you need get there in time to get your older chid to sport or creative writing or whatever.
5. You can on no account be late picking up the child who is in pre-school because they will be totally distresssed and think you have left them for ever. Yes, that is how a 4 year old can feel, despite the fact that they are the most important part of your life & you have not stopped thinking of him/her since you did the drop off.
6. On the way home you need to do the shop for the four people in your household – two are huge-eating teenagers and the fridge is constantly empty – and there is a major load to carry.
7. Your employer has chosen to relocate to the other end/side of town. Do you sell up & move? You are not the only one living in the house & everyone’s lives need to be accommodated.

This is just a few things that I can think of off the top of my head, and does not include any real level of disability.

The assumption that someone else can do what you can do just is not a feasible way to make decisions. We live in a community & need to have policy makers who are able to think widely and deeply enough to accommodate the most people possible.

This is my beef with the tram choosing process. The thinking and researching was not done. Nothing was considered to solve this city’s public transport needs, besides trams.

It is not well considered.

This is what happens when governments “plan for the future”.
http://www.9news.com.au/national/2016/02/15/19/31/ghost-trains-operating-on-sydney-south-west-rail-link
Wow! Only 1655 passengers on a “busy” day from 132 services!
And the population density in that area of South Western Sydney is very high.
Also, trains are virtually empty at the weekend. The NSW government will have to wait until the next ice age to see it start to get near use projections.
A total waste of over $2 billion. Thank goodness our Government knows what they are doing.

It got cut so I’m posting it again:

NSW Gross Territorial Product: $67,841 per capita

ACT Gross Territorial Product: $72,411 per capita

May I suggest more Homework and less Guesswork!

LostProfit said :

Why does the duly elected government need a mandate for a public works project?

they dont.
to think they do is pure rubbish.

no liberal government would ask the question of whether they have a mandate when deciding to sell public assets, why should any government then think twice when deciding to build them?

Exactly,
That’s why there was never any similar discussions about government’s privatising utilities in various other states.

Oh wait……

dungfungus said :

wildturkeycanoe said :

dungfungus said :

This is interesting:
http://www.railwaygazette.com/news/urban/single-view/view/midland-metro-trams-to-be-converted-for-catenary-free-operation.html
These trams are similar to the ones Canberra is to get so are we getting the new battery ones or the ones with the old super-capictor technology?
Note the batteries have to be replaced every seven years and the cost is not quoted.
This will probably mean no heating or cooling for passengers when they are running on batteries only.

Will that also mean no wi fi?

I think wi-fi is powered remotely but JC would have to adjudicate on that one.
What it means is that if the trams Canberra have ordered are fitted with super-capacitors instead of the new batteries then they will be obsolete before a wheel flange touches a rail.

Again more negativity without thinking. Wireless operation is not a requirement of the first line so they wont have batteries or super capacitors. But the design is capable of retrofitting if need be.

And for what it is worth, WiFi would run off the ancillary supply so would work on batteries. Along with the traction motors, the lights and everything else. This is 2016 afterall, not 1996.

wildturkeycanoe said :

dungfungus said :

This is interesting:
http://www.railwaygazette.com/news/urban/single-view/view/midland-metro-trams-to-be-converted-for-catenary-free-operation.html
These trams are similar to the ones Canberra is to get so are we getting the new battery ones or the ones with the old super-capictor technology?
Note the batteries have to be replaced every seven years and the cost is not quoted.
This will probably mean no heating or cooling for passengers when they are running on batteries only.

Will that also mean no wi fi?

I think wi-fi is powered remotely but JC would have to adjudicate on that one.
What it means is that if the trams Canberra have ordered are fitted with super-capacitors instead of the new batteries then they will be obsolete before a wheel flange touches a rail.

Arthur Davies5:19 pm 15 Feb 16

wildturkeycanoe said :

rubaiyat said :

A few questions from the floor:

1. What will 13,000 Prius or Teslas cost?

2. How many Northbourne Avenues have you got in mind for them to drive on?

3. What do you do with the enormous number of vehicles for the 95% of the day that they are doing nothing?

4. Is this more than just a thought bubble?

13,000 sub $50k electric cars would only cost 650 million dollars, but they aren’t being funded by the ratepayer now are they? These would be privately purchased and paid for, giving money to our major lenders on the way. Where will the tram money come from? Everybody’s pockets in Canberra.

We still only need one Northbourne Avenue, because there is also a GDE and Majura Parkway for people to use to get beyond Civic. If they made the speed limit a bit faster, timed the lights better and made the left lane a “Bus Only” lane with more services, I’m sure the congestion problems will not be as bad as they are now.

What do you do with the empty trams that have to run every 6 minutes even when nobody is on them? Now that is a waste of energy, money and continues to add to congestion problems unnecessarily. The 13,000 electric cars will be quietly recharging for their trip home, to pick up the kids, to go shopping and whatever the owners want them to do with the additional benefit of the freedom to go anywhere the owner wants to, not just the confines of Gungahlin.

Mark Ellis’ thought bubble has infinitely more wisdom than the Labor/Green’s 19th century solution. While we are at it, we might as well bring back the horse and carriage, it’ll be just as fast as the tram, uses no electricity or fossil fuels and definitely will make Canberra different to every other major city in the world.

You are quite right regarding the efficiency of off peak lightly loaded trams, the efficiency is woeful unless the tram is full (of largely standing) passengers, lower than an i c car let alone an electric one. But the problem is congestion not efficiency.

History shows us that the electric tram was developed in the late 1800s not to solve a transport problem but to get ride of pollution back then. Around 1900 Melbourne had to get rid of 500T per DAY of manure, as well as the odd dead horse. They had transport, walking (hailed by many as a great health benefit) or on horseback, cart, or carriage. The tram was designed to get rid of manure & it did so very effectively until it in turn was superseded by faster & more effective transport modes (except in 2 out of 25 cities with trams back then). At least the pollution now does not stick to your boots!

Why are we promised a system that solved a problem 130 years ago that no longer exists? The Govt admits publicly that it did not investigate all the available transport options but chose trams essentially as a guess & as they also again openly admit “to drive redevelopment along Northbourne Av”.

Why does the duly elected government need a mandate for a public works project?

they dont.
to think they do is pure rubbish.

no liberal government would ask the question of whether they have a mandate when deciding to sell public assets, why should any government then think twice when deciding to build them?

Arthur Davies4:58 pm 15 Feb 16

I am not sure what a “mandate” means in this context. I my books, it is a single decision on a single policy. It surely is not whatever the government chooses to do when it is elected on a grab bag of many policies, some of which some votes are in favour of, others not. Always remember that a Govt gets there by having a large mix of policies which are on balance not quite as bad as the policy mix of those who lost.

There is no way that a govt can claim large scale support for any one policy out of so many (even if they actually did what was policy in all cases after being elected, or am I being confused by “core & non-core”.

To have a genuine iron clad mandate, the single policy would have to be voted on by all electors after FULL disclosure of all the implications, not just financial. I think this is called a referendum. Bring it on if the Govt claims a real mandate. If they will not, what are they afraid of or what are they hiding?

rommeldog56 said :

rubaiyat said :

Please can we stop the ludicrous claims of an ACT “narrow tax base”?

Unlike every other government in Australia, the ACT has an extremely broad range of income sources from rates, GST, Stamp Duty, service and parking charges, penalties and above all land sales in the only jurisdiction that owns and leases, NOT sells the land.

What do u mean “unlike” ? ACT has next to zero royalities from mining for example – unlike rthe States & NT.

The other States also have all the revenue raising sources that you mention. Pluse the ACTs population and commercial/business base is much, much smaller.

Whether ACT land is leasehold or freehold means nothing re revenue.

The ACt is like a teenage child being pushed to “grow up” well before it has a chance to do that in a natural, properly planned way.

And offset for a large part by being essentially a city ‘state’. So no great expenses in supporting remote area schooling, hospitals, police, fire etc etc etc.

rubaiyat said :

Please can we stop the ludicrous claims of an ACT “narrow tax base”?

Unlike every other government in Australia, the ACT has an extremely broad range of income sources from rates, GST, Stamp Duty, service and parking charges, penalties and above all land sales in the only jurisdiction that owns and leases, NOT sells the land.

What do u mean “unlike” ? ACT has next to zero royalities from mining for example – unlike rthe States & NT. The other States also have all the revenue raising sources that you mention. Pluse the ACTs population and commercial/business base is much, much smaller. Whether ACT land is leasehold or freehold means nothing re revenue.

The ACt is like a teenage child being pushed to “grow up” well before it has a chance to do that in a natural, properly planned way.

wildturkeycanoe2:27 pm 14 Feb 16

dungfungus said :

This is interesting:
http://www.railwaygazette.com/news/urban/single-view/view/midland-metro-trams-to-be-converted-for-catenary-free-operation.html
These trams are similar to the ones Canberra is to get so are we getting the new battery ones or the ones with the old super-capictor technology?
Note the batteries have to be replaced every seven years and the cost is not quoted.
This will probably mean no heating or cooling for passengers when they are running on batteries only.

Will that also mean no wi fi?

I’ll be in Adelaide next week and might check out the O Bahn if I have time.

It only stops twice en route in the 12km/15 min trip. If it had the same number of stops (11) as the equal distance Gungahlin route it would probably be about the same speed. It carries approximately 31,000 people per weekday.

It was originally supposed to be Light Rail, so you can consider it a Light Rail Substitute and moves people from the Northwestern suburbs into the City much like the Gungahlin to City Light Rail and for a similar population.

The City of Tea Tree Gully, the O Bahn terminus, has a stable population of 95,000 and density of approx. 1000/km.

Gungahlin has a population of 48,000 growing to 73,000 by 2021. Current density is 520/km increasing with overall growth. Maybe somebody can help with the ultimate planned population.

btw That 6.1km O Bahn extension is costing $160 million.

That would be $320 million just for the double concrete right of way from Gungahlin to the City. Which may as well be a Berlin Wall for anybody living on either side of it.

Add the vehicles, fuel and operating costs for 20-30 years and I can’t see much difference to the Light Rail.

Claytons Busways, which usually are ripped up and replaced by Light Rail, have always been a mythical furphy promoted by people who won’t use it, but desperately want to cling to roads and cars.

rubaiyat said :

Please can we stop the ludicrous claims of an ACT “narrow tax base”?

Unlike every other government in Australia, the ACT has an extremely broad range of income sources from rates, GST, Stamp Duty, service and parking charges, penalties and above all land sales in the only jurisdiction that owns and leases, NOT sells the land.

Also stop the totally unfounded claims of inevitable bankruptcy which is not shared by any sane person on this planet, nor any of the financial ratings companies which rate the ACT AAA. Those claims are frankly libelous, or would be if anyone outside a small knitting circle of OAPs in Tuggeranong believed them.

http://www.canberratimes.com.au/act-news/standard-and-poors-retain-aaa-credit-rating-for-canberra-20150925-gjuyto.html

Most of the rise in debt is due to the Mr Fluffy buy back which is an arch example of the public liabilities resulting from environmental damage caused by frankly stupid private corporate and consumer behaviour.

The Queensland Government is facing similar environmental blackmail over the looming Townsville Nickel refinery tailings dam disaster.

http://www.afr.com/business/mining/clive-palmers-qld-nickel-cut-287m-set-aside-to-clean-up-toxic-sludge-20160118-gm8pt6

Qld Nickel has cut $287 million from its environmental obligations despite the estimated $1.4 billion cost to cleanup and somehow, no-one knows how, stop all the poisons in the dams flowing out into the Great Barrier Reef.

A typical bill delivered to the taxpayer after all the “Job Creating” hype has turned into a foul, abandoned, liability.

We are only beginning to get a taste of the astronomic liabilities we are facing for over two hundred years of burning fossil fuels and ongoing environmental damage. Still continuing because of the small minded ignorance and short term thinking of politicians and some members of the public who wrongly associate pollution with economic activity and prosperity.

The local “astronomic liability” we have is the $5 billion unfunded pensions owing to ACT government employees. There is nothing libellous about that fact which was reported on by the ACT Audit Office.
Maybe you can put forward your business plan to pay this off?
If you want to curtail pollution stop travelling around so much.

dungfungus said :

This is interesting:
http://www.railwaygazette.com/news/urban/single-view/view/midland-metro-trams-to-be-converted-for-catenary-free-operation.html
These trams are similar to the ones Canberra is to get so are we getting the new battery ones or the ones with the old super-capictor technology?
Note the batteries have to be replaced every seven years and the cost is not quoted.
This will probably mean no heating or cooling for passengers when they are running on batteries only.

dungfungus said :

This is interesting:
http://www.railwaygazette.com/news/urban/single-view/view/midland-metro-trams-to-be-converted-for-catenary-free-operation.html
These trams are similar to the ones Canberra is to get so are we getting the new battery ones or the ones with the old super-capictor technology?
Note the batteries have to be replaced every seven years and the cost is not quoted.
This will probably mean no heating or cooling for passengers when they are running on batteries only.

If you took the time the read and comprehend the article you will see that Midland Metro said “catenary-free operation had been envisaged when the CAF trams were ordered in 2012, and the contract included provision for retrofitting. ” and that “four more trams have been ordered which will be supplied with batteries already fitted”

So in other words they thought ahead, ordered a tram that could be retrofitted with batteries and are now buying more already fitted with batteries.

So good result. As for Canberra the tram can be retrofitted with batteries, so if the Russell extension gets the nod it is trivial to retrofit, as is the case for Midland Metro.

And PS you still get a/c when running on batteries.

pajs said :

Leon said :

Did the Government wait until after the 2012 election to inform the public that it had found that the extra costs of light rail exceeded its extra benefits by more than $230 million, compared with bus rapid transit?

This information was available in the ACT Government’s August 2012 submission to Infrastructure Australia. I for one did not become aware of it until much later.

Personally, I’d prefer a good network of o-bahn-ish dedicated lanes for bus rapid transport, rather than light rail, but the Libs killed off the Belconnen Busway project and there needs to be consequences for such decisions. Play silly buggers with sensible proposals like that and you reap the consequences of Plan B’s that you might like less. Let’s get the light rail built and have done with it.

Adelaide is building a 6.1 km extension to its O Bahn. It is however still largely running on fossil fuels despite the possibility of having trolley/electric buses on the track.

If they were fully electrified a lot of objection to the system would go away, but they still have a string of problems which is why so few have been built.

1. They require more expensive modified buses which carry extra weight due to the retractable wheeled guides and need to be unmodified at end of life.

2. They require a lot of drivers

3. They are energy inefficient, noisier and pollute far more than railed options.

4. They are just as uncomfortable as buses because they are buses

5. They not only run on hard paved surfaces they require additional multiple side barriers

6. They create a greater barrier, than roads/cars/buses on their own

The necessity for physical guides is dated IMHO. It should be possible to run driverless buses using electronic guides, although that would compromise personal and physical safety.

It is certainly possible to improve buses as part of a larger transport network.

Their weaknesses are uncertainty of operation, slow boarding, the number required, relatively lower energy efficiency, noise, safety, number of drivers required and bad planning which makes their routes so tedious.

Using GPSes to alert waiting passengers to their timing and position would be a huge leap forwards.

Better ticketing would let passengers simply walk on walk off without the considerable delays from people fiddling with tickets, tag points, or payments.

Driverless operation would eliminate the empty running between shifts and solve the “No Show” problem when buses simply don’t run a scheduled route for whatever reason. Also I assume a programmed bus would better smooth out the route speed and allow route optimisation with software that learns. It could possibly be “requested”, taking an electronic charge upon request to avoid nuisance calls.

Increased speed on express routes would improve connections, increase frequency, and/or reduce the number of vehicles.

None of this eliminates the need for a real mass transport system for the mass transport of people. The principle problem being peak hours which is well met by scheduled mass transport using a small number of vehicles operating frequently during peak hours and less frequently in off peak.

Peak hours are very inefficiently met by cars and roads which have to be built for the maximum capacity and remain largely underutilised for the remainder of the day. Cars and roads are extremely obstructive and dangerous in use, but even when they are doing nothing or very little, which is most of the time. They remain dangerous and unpleasant barriers through out the city, impossible barriers when they cut through the landscape. They are a particularly bad fit with residential areas, dangerous for children and the frail, generating enormous amounts of noise and pollution.

Littering wide expanses of hard pavement with badly under utilised vehicles, adds pollution and heat to already hot cities. Busy roads and excessive number of vehicles dumped in city centres for most of the day are an urban death sentence. They are hugely expensive to own and run and are a huge drain on our balance of payments as nearly all the vehicles and fuel are now imported. The polluting fuel alone comes on a tenuously long supply chain that funds the world’s major trouble spots and is ruining our planet.

As a city grows it needs to solve the principle problem of people movement that does not so dominate the city that it destroys it. We have countless examples around the world of what works and what doesn’t, unfortunately very little of it is planned, most tacked on after the event and most dominated by people looking at it purely from a single perspective and ignoring that their choice usually conflicts with everyone else’s, the problem increasing exponentially as population grows.

Time to cut the excuses, and the totally unnecessary fear campaign (because it is change) and get on with the job. No solution is going to please everyone but doing nothing will absolutely displease everyone, especially those too shortsighted to see what is coming.

OpenYourMind9:52 am 14 Feb 16

rubaiyat said :

rommeldog56 said :

To me, it’s the detail & flow on effects that was not known at the 2012 ACT election, but which now is known such as the potential subsidy compared to buses, the incredibly low Benefits Costs Ratio (1:1.2), the Environmental Impact Statement (which clearly states that road congestion will worsen, not improve – post Light Rail), the cancellation of the Gunners-City express bus routes, phasing of traffic lights to help speed up trams, the fact that a tram ride will take about the same amount of time as an express bus, not knowing what was actually under Northborne Ave that might have to be moved, etc, that should have been put to a vote in 2016 before contracts were signed.

To claim that the ACT Labor/Greens Gov’t had a “mandate” to commence construction of the Light Rail before the 2016 election without the depth of knowledge and appreciation of the detail and flow on impacts that are now known and visible, in a jurisdiction with such a narrow revenue raising base as the ACT, is laughable.

But then again, the gullible ACT voters did it I suppose……….

Arch hypocrisy.

You have never known, nor ever asked the details for any of the freeways nor demanded referenda for them, nor demanded they be tollways and self financed, and have perpetually attacked the Government for not costing projects. Now that they have, you want them to have known the cost before having gone through the bidding process.

The cost is much as estimated, and put to the public before the election, despite this is not an iPhone you buy off the shelf from the Apple Store.

You will be free to go ahead with as much personal environmental damage with your car/s, out of bitter dog in the manger spite, which it seems is all you want.

What exactly is the reason for your extreme hysteria over a simple public transport project that should keep Northbourne Avenue from turning into Parramatta Road as Canberra inevitably doubles in population?

You seem to hate congestion but demand that everything be done to increase it. Crazy!

The tram will make congestion on Northbourne a lot worse – despite claiming some miracle return on investment in the business case based on shorter commute times. Even if public transport (currently in decline in Canberra) doubles, the tram will still only be servicing a tiny percentage of commuters yet cost a staggering amount. You can’t compare roads as 1. roads service the vast majority of all transport requirements in Canberra 2. Even if you have a tram, you still need roads.

For the small difference a tram will make, you could simply build a safe bicycle freeway on the same route and offer a GPS based travel incentive for commuters where you pay them to ride. You’d get a much, much greater uptake than tram use, help community health, the environment, reduce parking etc. etc.

At least you can extend a bicycle highway to the parliamentary triangle. Overhead wired trams, not so much. I can already see the headlines in the future – stupid planning lead to tram that can’t even cross LBG. The best future planning if the tram goes ahead is to work out what to do with tram facilities when the tram is decommissioned. Would a gold plated tram station make for a good restaurant for example?

dungfungus said :

This will probably mean no heating or cooling for passengers when they are running on batteries only.

Not true. Because they are not running permanently on batteries, they only have to move to the next stop where they pick up another charge. Given their low friction and low energy requirements they do they need constant charging. There are also fast charging batteries on the horizon.

Fast charging better batteries that will be here long before Park Assist Autonomous Cars PAAC our roads, creating huge long Parking Lots full of people who can’t bear their fellow human beings and continue to occupy mostly empty individual 1-2 tonne energy and space wasters, with the curtains pulled (so they can peer angrily through them) at “Those People”.

Not having to drive, the “Real Problem Solved”, will give them all the time in the world to text furiously from the back seat about all those *other* people causing the problem.

Postalgeek said :

dungfungus said :

And as single-use plastic bags of 35 microns thickness or less are banned there goes another option.

Fixed. Carry on with your plastic bags of 36 microns or more.

As you are aware, I did not refer to “microns” in my post you have quoted me from.

Maybe this would have been a better solution for Canberra. It’s certainty a lot sexier that trams.
http://www.railwaygazette.com/news/news/asia/single-view/view/incheon-airport-maglev-starts-passenger-services.html

This is interesting:
http://www.railwaygazette.com/news/urban/single-view/view/midland-metro-trams-to-be-converted-for-catenary-free-operation.html
These trams are similar to the ones Canberra is to get so are we getting the new battery ones or the ones with the old super-capictor technology?
Note the batteries have to be replaced every seven years and the cost is not quoted.
This will probably mean no heating or cooling for passengers when they are running on batteries only.

dungfungus said :

And as single-use plastic bags of 35 microns thickness or less are banned there goes another option.

Fixed. Carry on with your plastic bags of 36 microns or more.

Please can we stop the ludicrous claims of an ACT “narrow tax base”?

Unlike every other government in Australia, the ACT has an extremely broad range of income sources from rates, GST, Stamp Duty, service and parking charges, penalties and above all land sales in the only jurisdiction that owns and leases, NOT sells the land.

Also stop the totally unfounded claims of inevitable bankruptcy which is not shared by any sane person on this planet, nor any of the financial ratings companies which rate the ACT AAA. Those claims are frankly libelous, or would be if anyone outside a small knitting circle of OAPs in Tuggeranong believed them.

http://www.canberratimes.com.au/act-news/standard-and-poors-retain-aaa-credit-rating-for-canberra-20150925-gjuyto.html

Most of the rise in debt is due to the Mr Fluffy buy back which is an arch example of the public liabilities resulting from environmental damage caused by frankly stupid private corporate and consumer behaviour.

The Queensland Government is facing similar environmental blackmail over the looming Townsville Nickel refinery tailings dam disaster.

http://www.afr.com/business/mining/clive-palmers-qld-nickel-cut-287m-set-aside-to-clean-up-toxic-sludge-20160118-gm8pt6

Qld Nickel has cut $287 million from its environmental obligations despite the estimated $1.4 billion cost to cleanup and somehow, no-one knows how, stop all the poisons in the dams flowing out into the Great Barrier Reef.

A typical bill delivered to the taxpayer after all the “Job Creating” hype has turned into a foul, abandoned, liability.

We are only beginning to get a taste of the astronomic liabilities we are facing for over two hundred years of burning fossil fuels and ongoing environmental damage. Still continuing because of the small minded ignorance and short term thinking of politicians and some members of the public who wrongly associate pollution with economic activity and prosperity.

rommeldog56 said :

To me, it’s the detail & flow on effects that was not known at the 2012 ACT election, but which now is known such as the potential subsidy compared to buses, the incredibly low Benefits Costs Ratio (1:1.2), the Environmental Impact Statement (which clearly states that road congestion will worsen, not improve – post Light Rail), the cancellation of the Gunners-City express bus routes, phasing of traffic lights to help speed up trams, the fact that a tram ride will take about the same amount of time as an express bus, not knowing what was actually under Northborne Ave that might have to be moved, etc, that should have been put to a vote in 2016 before contracts were signed.

To claim that the ACT Labor/Greens Gov’t had a “mandate” to commence construction of the Light Rail before the 2016 election without the depth of knowledge and appreciation of the detail and flow on impacts that are now known and visible, in a jurisdiction with such a narrow revenue raising base as the ACT, is laughable.

But then again, the gullible ACT voters did it I suppose……….

Arch hypocrisy.

You have never known, nor ever asked the details for any of the freeways nor demanded referenda for them, nor demanded they be tollways and self financed, and have perpetually attacked the Government for not costing projects. Now that they have, you want them to have known the cost before having gone through the bidding process.

The cost is much as estimated, and put to the public before the election, despite this is not an iPhone you buy off the shelf from the Apple Store.

You will be free to go ahead with as much personal environmental damage with your car/s, out of bitter dog in the manger spite, which it seems is all you want.

What exactly is the reason for your extreme hysteria over a simple public transport project that should keep Northbourne Avenue from turning into Parramatta Road as Canberra inevitably doubles in population?

You seem to hate congestion but demand that everything be done to increase it. Crazy!

dungfungus said :

rommeldog56 said :

rubaiyat said :

I have worked for 3 companies that folded………

Well, maybe you can get a job with with successful consortium, Canberra Metro – or with the ACT Gov’t Capital Metro agency, then ?

It may not be necessary to terminate contracts after all !!

And if light rail is so damn good why aren’t you investing your own money it it?

Why are you not personally paying for the freeways, and why are they not PPP tollways if they are “so damn good”, as in many other States where the Governments distort the road usage, closing off surrounding streets and options to force users onto them?

pink little birdie said :

“A city that is big on trams (Adelaide) has this headline in their local paper this morning.
“Unpaid fines hits record $361 million in SA despite crackdown”
I’m thinking ahead a bit but if the ACT Greens get their way and severely curtail car use here there will be a substantial drop off in revenue from traffic fines, not that our government has the will to collect them anyway.”

Uhhh Adelaide is mostly Trains and only has 1 tram City to Glenelg and has 2 ticket free zones at each end. Slight confusion about these may be a contributing factor to the unpaid fines. And their fairly recent change of ticketing system.

So, what is your point? Is it good or bad that the unpaid fines are forgiveable?

rommeldog56 said :

rubaiyat said :

I have worked for 3 companies that folded………

Well, maybe you can get a job with with successful consortium, Canberra Metro – or with the ACT Gov’t Capital Metro agency, then ?

It may not be necessary to terminate contracts after all !!

And if light rail is so damn good why aren’t you investing your own money it it?

pink little birdie said :

“A city that is big on trams (Adelaide) has this headline in their local paper this morning.
“Unpaid fines hits record $361 million in SA despite crackdown”
I’m thinking ahead a bit but if the ACT Greens get their way and severely curtail car use here there will be a substantial drop off in revenue from traffic fines, not that our government has the will to collect them anyway.”

Uhhh Adelaide is mostly Trains and only has 1 tram City to Glenelg and has 2 ticket free zones at each end. Slight confusion about these may be a contributing factor to the unpaid fines. And their fairly recent change of ticketing system.

dungfungus didn’t actually say that it was supposedly the Trams but may have, as he often does, suggested a totally false association.

It is total fines, all categories, the vast majority of course being car related speeding, parking and traffic infringements.

dungfungus has previously suggested fare evasion as a “reason” (as if he needs any) to deny Light Rail. I raised this as the answer to the obvious furphy. By his logic cars should be banned due to their obvious overwhelming link to common crime.

btw Looking this up, SA is chicken feed, QLD under the Newman government was hitting $1 billion in unpaid fines.

rubaiyat said :

I have worked for 3 companies that folded………

Well, maybe you can get a job with with successful consortium, Canberra Metro – or with the ACT Gov’t Capital Metro agency, then ? It may not be necessary to terminate contracts after all !!

To me, it’s the detail & flow on effects that was not known at the 2012 ACT election, but which now is known such as the potential subsidy compared to buses, the incredibly low Benefits Costs Ratio (1:1.2), the Environmental Impact Statement (which clearly states that road congestion will worsen, not improve – post Light Rail), the cancellation of the Gunners-City express bus routes, phasing of traffic lights to help speed up trams, the fact that a tram ride will take about the same amount of time as an express bus, not knowing what was actually under Northborne Ave that might have to be moved, etc, that should have been put to a vote in 2016 before contracts were signed.

To claim that the ACT Labor/Greens Gov’t had a “mandate” to commence construction of the Light Rail before the 2016 election without the depth of knowledge and appreciation of the detail and flow on impacts that are now known and visible, in a jurisdiction with such a narrow revenue raising base as the ACT, is laughable.

But then again, the gullible ACT voters did it I suppose……….

HiddenDragon6:07 pm 12 Feb 16

dungfungus said :

rubaiyat said :

gazket said :

rubaiyat said :

So the “fiscally responsible” opposition will show us how that is done by canceling the contract at any cost?

Didn’t they also say this would cost billions, or was that billions with them in charge?

That cancellation will be Labor’s gift to the ACT community. Labor is pushing ahead with the tram to cloud a massive budget deficit it has no idea how to fix except for trippling rates which Labor denied and passed of scaremongering last election.

Don’t let the door hit you on the way out.

I read that, then I read that again, then I read it bit by bit. Other than an unbearable hysteria bursting out it just doesn’t make sense, and what door are you talking about?

One of the hardest decisions to make in business is to know when to “close the door”.
When the business project that is launched with much enthusiasm and fanfare turns to failure and misery the business owner has to decide whether it is cheaper to continue the business which is incurring unsustainable losses leading to bankruptcy or to cease trading (close the doors) which will still mean contractual liabilities will still exist (like rent) but it leaves an option to negotiate a way out and preserve one’s solvency.
I doubt if you have ever experienced this phenomenon; I have and the the thing I remember most was a colleague who said before I started the venture with starry eyes was “you will be happy twice with this venture – the day you open your doors and the day you decide to close them.”
The light rail undertaking will be the same but the initiators will walk away financially unscathed and leave the liability in the laps of the ratepayers.
It may be that ACT public servants (sitting on $5 billion of unfunded benefits) may lose their pensions because of this as decisions will have to be made about budget priorities (health services in umber one) after the light rail project collapses (which it will).
It is only fair that Labor is re-elected to at least “face the music”.

The “solution” to all of this will be ever higher rates, taxes and charges in the ACT, which will only serve to reinforce our status as a public service company town (hence the latest stern letter from the Chief Minister to the PM), with a private sector which exists predominantly to supply those goods and services which need to be provided locally (rather than purchased online etc.) and with a small niche/boutique technical/creative sector – the latter sometimes outstanding, but never likely to be a significant employer in the broader ACT economy.

pink little birdie1:28 pm 12 Feb 16

“A city that is big on trams (Adelaide) has this headline in their local paper this morning.
“Unpaid fines hits record $361 million in SA despite crackdown”
I’m thinking ahead a bit but if the ACT Greens get their way and severely curtail car use here there will be a substantial drop off in revenue from traffic fines, not that our government has the will to collect them anyway.”

Uhhh Adelaide is mostly Trains and only has 1 tram City to Glenelg and has 2 ticket free zones at each end. Slight confusion about these may be a contributing factor to the unpaid fines. And their fairly recent change of ticketing system.

rubaiyat said :

dungfungus said :

rubaiyat said :

gazket said :

rubaiyat said :

So the “fiscally responsible” opposition will show us how that is done by canceling the contract at any cost?

Didn’t they also say this would cost billions, or was that billions with them in charge?

That cancellation will be Labor’s gift to the ACT community. Labor is pushing ahead with the tram to cloud a massive budget deficit it has no idea how to fix except for trippling rates which Labor denied and passed of scaremongering last election.

Don’t let the door hit you on the way out.

I read that, then I read that again, then I read it bit by bit. Other than an unbearable hysteria bursting out it just doesn’t make sense, and what door are you talking about?

One of the hardest decisions to make in business is to know when to “close the door”.
When the business project that is launched with much enthusiasm and fanfare turns to failure and misery the business owner has to decide whether it is cheaper to continue the business which is incurring unsustainable losses leading to bankruptcy or to cease trading (close the doors) which will still mean contractual liabilities will still exist (like rent) but it leaves an option to negotiate a way out and preserve one’s solvency.
I doubt if you have ever experienced this phenomenon; I have and the the thing I remember most was a colleague who said before I started the venture with starry eyes was “you will be happy twice with this venture – the day you open your doors and the day you decide to close them.”
The light rail undertaking will be the same but the initiators will walk away financially unscathed and leave the liability in the laps of the ratepayers.
It may be that ACT public servants (sitting on $5 billion of unfunded benefits) may lose their pensions because of this as decisions will have to be made about budget priorities (health services in umber one) after the light rail project collapses (which it will).
It is only fair that Labor is re-elected to at least “face the music”.

I have worked for 3 companies that folded, two of which I got out before the sh*t hit the fan because I don’t close my eyes to reality. And I am well aware of what the “certainty” looks like that leads to people going over the cliff. The perpetual “No it’s not” right up to the “Oh yes it is”.

This coming cliff is global and sadly we have a plethora of people thinking they can ignore it all, and fighting tooth and nail against any change. Only concerned for themselves and the piddly short term costs against the ultimately far greater costs.

Mr Fluffy on an enormous scale.

Let’s get this right then.
You actually believe that a tram service in Canberra is going to avert the next GFC?

rommeldog56 said :

wildturkeycanoe said :

Mark Ellis’ thought bubble has infinitely more wisdom than the Labor/Green’s 19th century solution. While we are at it, we might as well bring back the horse and carriage, it’ll be just as fast as the tram, uses no electricity or fossil fuels and definitely will make Canberra different to every other major city in the world.

Nah – that would require a new law requiring the carriage driver to carry plastic bags to pick up the horse poop. Great big plastic bags actually……..

And as plastic bags are banned there goes another option.

Leon said :

Did the Government wait until after the 2012 election to inform the public that it had found that the extra costs of light rail exceeded its extra benefits by more than $230 million, compared with bus rapid transit?

This information was available in the ACT Government’s August 2012 submission to Infrastructure Australia. I for one did not become aware of it until much later.

Personally, I’d prefer a good network of o-bahn-ish dedicated lanes for bus rapid transport, rather than light rail, but the Libs killed off the Belconnen Busway project and there needs to be consequences for such decisions. Play silly buggers with sensible proposals like that and you reap the consequences of Plan B’s that you might like less. Let’s get the light rail built and have done with it.

wildturkeycanoe said :

Mark Ellis’ thought bubble has infinitely more wisdom than the Labor/Green’s 19th century solution. While we are at it, we might as well bring back the horse and carriage, it’ll be just as fast as the tram, uses no electricity or fossil fuels and definitely will make Canberra different to every other major city in the world.

Nah – that would require a new law requiring the carriage driver to carry plastic bags to pick up the horse poop. Great big plastic bags actually……..

dungfungus said :

rubaiyat said :

gazket said :

rubaiyat said :

So the “fiscally responsible” opposition will show us how that is done by canceling the contract at any cost?

Didn’t they also say this would cost billions, or was that billions with them in charge?

That cancellation will be Labor’s gift to the ACT community. Labor is pushing ahead with the tram to cloud a massive budget deficit it has no idea how to fix except for trippling rates which Labor denied and passed of scaremongering last election.

Don’t let the door hit you on the way out.

I read that, then I read that again, then I read it bit by bit. Other than an unbearable hysteria bursting out it just doesn’t make sense, and what door are you talking about?

One of the hardest decisions to make in business is to know when to “close the door”.
When the business project that is launched with much enthusiasm and fanfare turns to failure and misery the business owner has to decide whether it is cheaper to continue the business which is incurring unsustainable losses leading to bankruptcy or to cease trading (close the doors) which will still mean contractual liabilities will still exist (like rent) but it leaves an option to negotiate a way out and preserve one’s solvency.
I doubt if you have ever experienced this phenomenon; I have and the the thing I remember most was a colleague who said before I started the venture with starry eyes was “you will be happy twice with this venture – the day you open your doors and the day you decide to close them.”
The light rail undertaking will be the same but the initiators will walk away financially unscathed and leave the liability in the laps of the ratepayers.
It may be that ACT public servants (sitting on $5 billion of unfunded benefits) may lose their pensions because of this as decisions will have to be made about budget priorities (health services in umber one) after the light rail project collapses (which it will).
It is only fair that Labor is re-elected to at least “face the music”.

I have worked for 3 companies that folded, two of which I got out before the sh*t hit the fan because I don’t close my eyes to reality. And I am well aware of what the “certainty” looks like that leads to people going over the cliff. The perpetual “No it’s not” right up to the “Oh yes it is”.

This coming cliff is global and sadly we have a plethora of people thinking they can ignore it all, and fighting tooth and nail against any change. Only concerned for themselves and the piddly short term costs against the ultimately far greater costs.

Mr Fluffy on an enormous scale.

A city that is big on trams (Adelaide) has this headline in their local paper this morning.
“Unpaid fines hits record $361 million in SA despite crackdown”
I’m thinking ahead a bit but if the ACT Greens get their way and severely curtail car use here there will be a substantial drop off in revenue from traffic fines, not that our government has the will to collect them anyway.

dungfungus said :

JC said :

farq said :

dungfungus said :

Charlotte Harper said :

But won enough votes to hold the balance of power …

Actually, the Liberals won more votes than Labor or the Greens.
I suppose the fact that the only Green re-elected (one out of four) gave his support to Labor is proof of a resounding victory.

Right on.

I voted Labor in the last election and did not think I was voting for a $700m monorail.

Hang off building it so I (and many others of us) can fix that mistake.

There is a good chance that there will be a change of government, why force them to waste >$20m cancelling it.

The responsible thing to do would be to wait a few months and seek a mandate again at the coming election.

Mandate again? So you agree they have one slready?

That would be “already” but you knew that didn’t you.

iPhone!

rubaiyat said :

gazket said :

rubaiyat said :

So the “fiscally responsible” opposition will show us how that is done by canceling the contract at any cost?

Didn’t they also say this would cost billions, or was that billions with them in charge?

That cancellation will be Labor’s gift to the ACT community. Labor is pushing ahead with the tram to cloud a massive budget deficit it has no idea how to fix except for trippling rates which Labor denied and passed of scaremongering last election.

Don’t let the door hit you on the way out.

I read that, then I read that again, then I read it bit by bit. Other than an unbearable hysteria bursting out it just doesn’t make sense, and what door are you talking about?

One of the hardest decisions to make in business is to know when to “close the door”.
When the business project that is launched with much enthusiasm and fanfare turns to failure and misery the business owner has to decide whether it is cheaper to continue the business which is incurring unsustainable losses leading to bankruptcy or to cease trading (close the doors) which will still mean contractual liabilities will still exist (like rent) but it leaves an option to negotiate a way out and preserve one’s solvency.
I doubt if you have ever experienced this phenomenon; I have and the the thing I remember most was a colleague who said before I started the venture with starry eyes was “you will be happy twice with this venture – the day you open your doors and the day you decide to close them.”
The light rail undertaking will be the same but the initiators will walk away financially unscathed and leave the liability in the laps of the ratepayers.
It may be that ACT public servants (sitting on $5 billion of unfunded benefits) may lose their pensions because of this as decisions will have to be made about budget priorities (health services in umber one) after the light rail project collapses (which it will).
It is only fair that Labor is re-elected to at least “face the music”.

miz said :

farq said :

dungfungus said :

Charlotte Harper said :

But won enough votes to hold the balance of power …

Actually, the Liberals won more votes than Labor or the Greens.
I suppose the fact that the only Green re-elected (one out of four) gave his support to Labor is proof of a resounding victory.

Right on.

I voted Labor in the last election and did not think I was voting for a $700m monorail.

Hang off building it so I (and many others of us) can fix that mistake.

There is a good chance that there will be a change of government, why force them to waste >$20m cancelling it.

The responsible thing to do would be to wait a few months and seek a mandate again at the coming election.

It seems strange that the govt is so unquestioning about the light rail, given that they’ve not honoured many of their other commitments with impunity (as noted by others). It’s as if they are afraid of the Green. Just WHAT does that Green have over them? It’s all very unsettling and does not give one confidence that the govt is governing for the electorate. Rather, it seems to be governing solely for one particular ‘special interest’.

It’s that unremitting green evil, so brave of you to speak up!

Did the Government wait until after the 2012 election to inform the public that it had found that the extra costs of light rail exceeded its extra benefits by more than $230 million, compared with bus rapid transit?

This information was available in the ACT Government’s August 2012 submission to Infrastructure Australia. I for one did not become aware of it until much later.

JC said :

farq said :

dungfungus said :

Charlotte Harper said :

But won enough votes to hold the balance of power …

Actually, the Liberals won more votes than Labor or the Greens.
I suppose the fact that the only Green re-elected (one out of four) gave his support to Labor is proof of a resounding victory.

Right on.

I voted Labor in the last election and did not think I was voting for a $700m monorail.

Hang off building it so I (and many others of us) can fix that mistake.

There is a good chance that there will be a change of government, why force them to waste >$20m cancelling it.

The responsible thing to do would be to wait a few months and seek a mandate again at the coming election.

Mandate again? So you agree they have one slready?

That would be “already” but you knew that didn’t you.

farq said :

dungfungus said :

Charlotte Harper said :

But won enough votes to hold the balance of power …

Actually, the Liberals won more votes than Labor or the Greens.
I suppose the fact that the only Green re-elected (one out of four) gave his support to Labor is proof of a resounding victory.

Right on.

I voted Labor in the last election and did not think I was voting for a $700m monorail.

Hang off building it so I (and many others of us) can fix that mistake.

There is a good chance that there will be a change of government, why force them to waste >$20m cancelling it.

The responsible thing to do would be to wait a few months and seek a mandate again at the coming election.

Mandate again? So you agree they have one slready?

dungfungus said :

JC said :

dungfungus said :

Ghettosmurf87 said :

bj_ACT said :

rubaiyat said :

dungfungus said :

Charlotte Harper said :

But won enough votes to hold the balance of power …

Actually, the Liberals won more votes than Labor or the Greens.
I suppose the fact that the only Green re-elected (one out of four) gave his support to Labor is proof of a resounding victory.

Are you claiming the Liberals got a majority of the votes? Which they didn’t.

Or you think they have a God given right to rule, no matter what the voters think? Which they don’t.

According to the Election results Dungfungus is actually correct (hey it surprised my to)

1st Liberal 86,032 votes
2nd Labor 85991 votes
3rd Greens 23773 votes
4th Motorists 9179 votes

As always, this debate is about semantics as there were just 41 votes that separated the Liberals and Labor. Therefore whichever one formed government with the Greens was going to have over 23,000 more votes supporting the government than whom supported the opposition. As well as having a 1 member majority in the assembly.

I can hear JC’s abacus whirring in the distance.

You keep telling us Labor and Greens are 1, so that makes it 109764 to 86,032.

Right on queue JC.

That would be cue, but I suspect you know that. Besides only gave a response because you asked.

farq said :

dungfungus said :

Charlotte Harper said :

But won enough votes to hold the balance of power …

Actually, the Liberals won more votes than Labor or the Greens.
I suppose the fact that the only Green re-elected (one out of four) gave his support to Labor is proof of a resounding victory.

Right on.

I voted Labor in the last election and did not think I was voting for a $700m monorail.

Hang off building it so I (and many others of us) can fix that mistake.

There is a good chance that there will be a change of government, why force them to waste >$20m cancelling it.

The responsible thing to do would be to wait a few months and seek a mandate again at the coming election.

It seems strange that the govt is so unquestioning about the light rail, given that they’ve not honoured many of their other commitments with impunity (as noted by others). It’s as if they are afraid of the Green. Just WHAT does that Green have over them? It’s all very unsettling and does not give one confidence that the govt is governing for the electorate. Rather, it seems to be governing solely for one particular ‘special interest’.

wildturkeycanoe7:04 am 12 Feb 16

rubaiyat said :

A few questions from the floor:

1. What will 13,000 Prius or Teslas cost?

2. How many Northbourne Avenues have you got in mind for them to drive on?

3. What do you do with the enormous number of vehicles for the 95% of the day that they are doing nothing?

4. Is this more than just a thought bubble?

13,000 sub $50k electric cars would only cost 650 million dollars, but they aren’t being funded by the ratepayer now are they? These would be privately purchased and paid for, giving money to our major lenders on the way. Where will the tram money come from? Everybody’s pockets in Canberra.

We still only need one Northbourne Avenue, because there is also a GDE and Majura Parkway for people to use to get beyond Civic. If they made the speed limit a bit faster, timed the lights better and made the left lane a “Bus Only” lane with more services, I’m sure the congestion problems will not be as bad as they are now.

What do you do with the empty trams that have to run every 6 minutes even when nobody is on them? Now that is a waste of energy, money and continues to add to congestion problems unnecessarily. The 13,000 electric cars will be quietly recharging for their trip home, to pick up the kids, to go shopping and whatever the owners want them to do with the additional benefit of the freedom to go anywhere the owner wants to, not just the confines of Gungahlin.

Mark Ellis’ thought bubble has infinitely more wisdom than the Labor/Green’s 19th century solution. While we are at it, we might as well bring back the horse and carriage, it’ll be just as fast as the tram, uses no electricity or fossil fuels and definitely will make Canberra different to every other major city in the world.

wildturkeycanoe6:36 am 12 Feb 16

pink little birdie said :

Starting it now will be cheaper than starting it in a years time or 5 years time.

How do you figure that, with a crystal ball or a time-traveling teleport device? We do not know what emerging technologies will be available in 5 years, there could a breakthrough in portable energy storage that makes the tram half as expensive due to there being no need for overhead power lines, sub stations and such. Think about solar panels and electricity storage ten years ago and the price of them today. Perhaps in 5 years the population will have exploded and this lemon will have half the impact on ratepayers it does at present. Look at the global financial situation right now and tell me we couldn’t wait for the uncertainty to pass before getting multinationals to put forward their financial backing on this project. Wouldn’t it be a disgrace to see the project only a third complete and then stocks crash suddenly, putting construction to an indefinite end? But hey, I’m crystal ball gazing now aren’t I?
I don’t see the need for this big rush on construction, surely we can wait at least till the elections are over before digging up the Avenue, chopping down all the beautiful gum trees and causing a headache for commuters every day for the next two years.

OpenYourMind6:35 am 12 Feb 16

rubaiyat said :

OpenYourMind said :

And for Rubaiyat’s benefit, you may well dismiss the notion of autonomous cars, but I note that even the local pollies supporting light rail are looking for trials in Canberra: http://citynews.com.au/2016/all-sides-of-politics-now-pushing-for-driverless-cars/

How does sitting in the back seat of a car fix congestion and massive energy waste and pollution, now let alone 20 – 30 years down the future?

Once again, autonomous vehicles fix congestion in any number of ways, starting with changing form factor to act as little micro buses for instance, being able to V2V (Vehicle to Vehicle) and route the most efficient route and work together, dropping people in slip lanes for efficient pickup set down, moving in a more fluid way (human beings reactions are the cause of much congestion). As for energy waste, autonomous will almost certainly be electric and powered by renewable and be self re-charging. Also autonomous can plan most energy efficient paths, compare that with an Action bus (and most likely a tram) that drives round at 2pm with 1 person on it. Autonomous is a potential paradigm shift. This is absolutely the worst time in history to contemplate massive capital investment in a tram tied to tram tracks and wires.

As for a mandate, we can argue all day whether there was one or not, however the next election is so close that it would be financial vandalism to commit our city to this tram nonsense when there is so much well reasoned opposition to it.

gazket said :

rubaiyat said :

So the “fiscally responsible” opposition will show us how that is done by canceling the contract at any cost?

Didn’t they also say this would cost billions, or was that billions with them in charge?

That cancellation will be Labor’s gift to the ACT community. Labor is pushing ahead with the tram to cloud a massive budget deficit it has no idea how to fix except for trippling rates which Labor denied and passed of scaremongering last election.

Don’t let the door hit you on the way out.

I read that, then I read that again, then I read it bit by bit. Other than an unbearable hysteria bursting out it just doesn’t make sense, and what door are you talking about?

dungfungus said :

Charlotte Harper said :

But won enough votes to hold the balance of power …

Actually, the Liberals won more votes than Labor or the Greens.
I suppose the fact that the only Green re-elected (one out of four) gave his support to Labor is proof of a resounding victory.

Right on.

I voted Labor in the last election and did not think I was voting for a $700m monorail.

Hang off building it so I (and many others of us) can fix that mistake.

There is a good chance that there will be a change of government, why force them to waste >$20m cancelling it.

The responsible thing to do would be to wait a few months and seek a mandate again at the coming election.

JC said :

dungfungus said :

Ghettosmurf87 said :

bj_ACT said :

rubaiyat said :

dungfungus said :

Charlotte Harper said :

But won enough votes to hold the balance of power …

Actually, the Liberals won more votes than Labor or the Greens.
I suppose the fact that the only Green re-elected (one out of four) gave his support to Labor is proof of a resounding victory.

Are you claiming the Liberals got a majority of the votes? Which they didn’t.

Or you think they have a God given right to rule, no matter what the voters think? Which they don’t.

According to the Election results Dungfungus is actually correct (hey it surprised my to)

1st Liberal 86,032 votes
2nd Labor 85991 votes
3rd Greens 23773 votes
4th Motorists 9179 votes

As always, this debate is about semantics as there were just 41 votes that separated the Liberals and Labor. Therefore whichever one formed government with the Greens was going to have over 23,000 more votes supporting the government than whom supported the opposition. As well as having a 1 member majority in the assembly.

I can hear JC’s abacus whirring in the distance.

You keep telling us Labor and Greens are 1, so that makes it 109764 to 86,032.

Right on queue JC.

If the Labor party needed the green vote to gain power and light rail is seen as a mandated policy, then what about the greens policy of reducing thru number of poker machines.

Now Shane wants to put more poker machines in the casino. If greens can renege on poker machines, should Labor do the same with the Tram.

dungfungus said :

Ghettosmurf87 said :

bj_ACT said :

rubaiyat said :

dungfungus said :

Charlotte Harper said :

But won enough votes to hold the balance of power …

Actually, the Liberals won more votes than Labor or the Greens.
I suppose the fact that the only Green re-elected (one out of four) gave his support to Labor is proof of a resounding victory.

Are you claiming the Liberals got a majority of the votes? Which they didn’t.

Or you think they have a God given right to rule, no matter what the voters think? Which they don’t.

According to the Election results Dungfungus is actually correct (hey it surprised my to)

1st Liberal 86,032 votes
2nd Labor 85991 votes
3rd Greens 23773 votes
4th Motorists 9179 votes

As always, this debate is about semantics as there were just 41 votes that separated the Liberals and Labor. Therefore whichever one formed government with the Greens was going to have over 23,000 more votes supporting the government than whom supported the opposition. As well as having a 1 member majority in the assembly.

I can hear JC’s abacus whirring in the distance.

You keep telling us Labor and Greens are 1, so that makes it 109764 to 86,032.

rubaiyat said :

So the “fiscally responsible” opposition will show us how that is done by canceling the contract at any cost?

Didn’t they also say this would cost billions, or was that billions with them in charge?

That cancellation will be Labor’s gift to the ACT community. Labor is pushing ahead with the tram to cloud a massive budget deficit it has no idea how to fix except for trippling rates which Labor denied and passed of scaremongering last election.

Don’t let the door hit you on the way out.

MarkE said :

The Liberal Democratic Party may well have the balance of power after the election so it is not just a Labor v. Canberra Liberals decision.

Light rail is a 19th Century solution to a 21st Century problem.
Canberra lacks the population density to support the project and Phase 1 is only projected to be used by 1% of the population.

It is fixed infrastructure that lacks flexibility. There are many new transport technologies on the near horizon such as electric driverless cars that could revolutionize public transport. While Canberra is paying off the large debt on obsolete technology we won’t have the money to put into new technologies.

Things the government could do now at low cost to improve transport include:
• Provide secure parking for bicycles at bus stops
• Repeal helmet laws.
• Support and legalize the use of electric powered bicycles and Segway like devices on appropriate roads with cycle paths.

Mark Ellis
President ACT Branch – Liberal Democratic Party
http://ldp.org.au/

A few questions from the floor:

1. What will 13,000 Prius or Teslas cost?

2. How many Northbourne Avenues have you got in mind for them to drive on?

3. What do you do with the enormous number of vehicles for the 95% of the day that they are doing nothing?

4. Is this more than just a thought bubble?

The Liberal Democratic Party may well have the balance of power after the election so it is not just a Labor v. Canberra Liberals decision.

Light rail is a 19th Century solution to a 21st Century problem.
Canberra lacks the population density to support the project and Phase 1 is only projected to be used by 1% of the population.

It is fixed infrastructure that lacks flexibility. There are many new transport technologies on the near horizon such as electric driverless cars that could revolutionize public transport. While Canberra is paying off the large debt on obsolete technology we won’t have the money to put into new technologies.

Things the government could do now at low cost to improve transport include:
• Provide secure parking for bicycles at bus stops
• Repeal helmet laws.
• Support and legalize the use of electric powered bicycles and Segway like devices on appropriate roads with cycle paths.

Mark Ellis
President ACT Branch – Liberal Democratic Party
http://ldp.org.au/

Charlotte Harper said :

Hi pajs, here’s the Liberals’ official response:

“No, we don’t. Last term we said we’d turn it into a T2 or T3. Incidentally, Labor has just turned a bus lane into a T2 on the Federal Highway.”

Thanks for that.

rubaiyat said :

dungfungus said :

Charlotte Harper said :

But won enough votes to hold the balance of power …

Actually, the Liberals won more votes than Labor or the Greens.
I suppose the fact that the only Green re-elected (one out of four) gave his support to Labor is proof of a resounding victory.

Are you claiming the Liberals got a majority of the votes? Which they didn’t.

Or you think they have a God given right to rule, no matter what the voters think? Which they don’t.

Obviously you are so besotted by Melbourne you forgot to do your usual forensics.
I suggest you hop on your tram, go back to Little Collins Street and have a double latte, Bex and a good lie down.

Simon Corbell misquotes Labor’s policy, which is to “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.”

The Government has established Capital Metro, and Capital Metro’s objective is to plan, finance and develop the first stage of a Light Rail Network for Canberra. So the Government has already met its light rail election commitment.

Ghettosmurf87 said :

bj_ACT said :

rubaiyat said :

dungfungus said :

Charlotte Harper said :

But won enough votes to hold the balance of power …

Actually, the Liberals won more votes than Labor or the Greens.
I suppose the fact that the only Green re-elected (one out of four) gave his support to Labor is proof of a resounding victory.

Are you claiming the Liberals got a majority of the votes? Which they didn’t.

Or you think they have a God given right to rule, no matter what the voters think? Which they don’t.

According to the Election results Dungfungus is actually correct (hey it surprised my to)

1st Liberal 86,032 votes
2nd Labor 85991 votes
3rd Greens 23773 votes
4th Motorists 9179 votes

As always, this debate is about semantics as there were just 41 votes that separated the Liberals and Labor. Therefore whichever one formed government with the Greens was going to have over 23,000 more votes supporting the government than whom supported the opposition. As well as having a 1 member majority in the assembly.

I can hear JC’s abacus whirring in the distance.

pink little birdie3:19 pm 11 Feb 16

I think that there will be more support for light rail than people currently think. Basically Canberra will have to start light rail/rail transport sometime and somewhere. Starting it now will be cheaper than starting it in a years time or 5 years time.

I’m Canberra born and bred and I have still made the choice to live in walking and cycling distance to work. If there was light rail I would be happy to live along the line and catch it to my work (note I don’t live in Gunghalin and I don’t work in the city). I drive but don’t like driving to work.

Ghettosmurf87 said :

bj_ACT said :

rubaiyat said :

dungfungus said :

Charlotte Harper said :

But won enough votes to hold the balance of power …

Actually, the Liberals won more votes than Labor or the Greens.
I suppose the fact that the only Green re-elected (one out of four) gave his support to Labor is proof of a resounding victory.

Are you claiming the Liberals got a majority of the votes? Which they didn’t.

Or you think they have a God given right to rule, no matter what the voters think? Which they don’t.

According to the Election results Dungfungus is actually correct (hey it surprised my to)

1st Liberal 86,032 votes
2nd Labor 85991 votes
3rd Greens 23773 votes
4th Motorists 9179 votes

As always, this debate is about semantics as there were just 41 votes that separated the Liberals and Labor. Therefore whichever one formed government with the Greens was going to have over 23,000 more votes supporting the government than whom supported the opposition. As well as having a 1 member majority in the assembly.

Assuming that all of the votes that didn’t support any of those three major parties don’t count?

bj_ACT said :

rubaiyat said :

dungfungus said :

Charlotte Harper said :

But won enough votes to hold the balance of power …

Actually, the Liberals won more votes than Labor or the Greens.
I suppose the fact that the only Green re-elected (one out of four) gave his support to Labor is proof of a resounding victory.

Are you claiming the Liberals got a majority of the votes? Which they didn’t.

Or you think they have a God given right to rule, no matter what the voters think? Which they don’t.

According to the Election results Dungfungus is actually correct (hey it surprised my to)

1st Liberal 86,032 votes
2nd Labor 85991 votes
3rd Greens 23773 votes
4th Motorists 9179 votes

No dungfungus is not “correct” and as a voter how are only now discovering this and then coming to a conclusion that we have some kind of first past the post system?

The Liberals got less than 40% of the primary vote and only a tiny handful more than Labor. Labor and the Greens combined got well over 10% more than the Liberals, just shy of a majority. They easily picked the rest of the votes to get them over the line from preferences. The greens were hard done by despite getting a substantial vote of 10.7% they only got one seat.

We have one of the most sophisticated and fair voting systems in the world, the shame is that that goes over the heads of so many.

Ghettosmurf871:43 pm 11 Feb 16

bj_ACT said :

rubaiyat said :

dungfungus said :

Charlotte Harper said :

But won enough votes to hold the balance of power …

Actually, the Liberals won more votes than Labor or the Greens.
I suppose the fact that the only Green re-elected (one out of four) gave his support to Labor is proof of a resounding victory.

Are you claiming the Liberals got a majority of the votes? Which they didn’t.

Or you think they have a God given right to rule, no matter what the voters think? Which they don’t.

According to the Election results Dungfungus is actually correct (hey it surprised my to)

1st Liberal 86,032 votes
2nd Labor 85991 votes
3rd Greens 23773 votes
4th Motorists 9179 votes

As always, this debate is about semantics as there were just 41 votes that separated the Liberals and Labor. Therefore whichever one formed government with the Greens was going to have over 23,000 more votes supporting the government than whom supported the opposition. As well as having a 1 member majority in the assembly.

bj_ACT said :

miz said :

Mysteryman said :

I see they’re already working on the pathetic solution to the Barton Hwy/Gundaroo Road roundabout. How many traffic lights, 9? All because $30m was too expensive for the correct solution – a flyover. What a stupid decision that was. Perhaps if they hadn’t recurring, increasing budget deficits in the area of $400m-$600m (which started well before the Mr Fluffy loan) they would have had the money to spend on doing the job properly. Seems like it should be a priority considering the sheer volume of people that use that intersection (another result of poor ACT Labor planning).

Ashley Drive duplication is to get a whole bunch of unwanted traffic lights too 🙁 AND they still can’t find the money to finish the last 100 metres of it, despite there being bucket loads for other things . . .

Is this the same Ashley Drive Extension that the Government has been promising and re-announcing for over a decade, but still never actually building????

The single lane main road gets something like 24,000 cars a day and is a crazy mix of slow and fast cars pulling in and out of it.

Yep. They have at least finally duplicated Erindale Drive to the Ashley Dr roundabout, though there is no mention of continuing the duplication to the Hyperdome, or duplicating Isabella or Johnson Drives. They only duplicated Tharwa Dr after a nasty fatal.
I think we are all supposed to be ever so grateful for the proliferation of unwanted speed bumps and for turning the bus stop at the Erindale shops into a ‘bus station’ with a mural :/

rubaiyat said :

dungfungus said :

Charlotte Harper said :

But won enough votes to hold the balance of power …

Actually, the Liberals won more votes than Labor or the Greens.
I suppose the fact that the only Green re-elected (one out of four) gave his support to Labor is proof of a resounding victory.

Are you claiming the Liberals got a majority of the votes? Which they didn’t.

Or you think they have a God given right to rule, no matter what the voters think? Which they don’t.

According to the Election results Dungfungus is actually correct (hey it surprised my to)

1st Liberal 86,032 votes
2nd Labor 85991 votes
3rd Greens 23773 votes
4th Motorists 9179 votes

dungfungus said :

Charlotte Harper said :

But won enough votes to hold the balance of power …

Actually, the Liberals won more votes than Labor or the Greens.
I suppose the fact that the only Green re-elected (one out of four) gave his support to Labor is proof of a resounding victory.

Are you claiming the Liberals got a majority of the votes? Which they didn’t.

Or you think they have a God given right to rule, no matter what the voters think? Which they don’t.

miz said :

Mysteryman said :

I see they’re already working on the pathetic solution to the Barton Hwy/Gundaroo Road roundabout. How many traffic lights, 9? All because $30m was too expensive for the correct solution – a flyover. What a stupid decision that was. Perhaps if they hadn’t recurring, increasing budget deficits in the area of $400m-$600m (which started well before the Mr Fluffy loan) they would have had the money to spend on doing the job properly. Seems like it should be a priority considering the sheer volume of people that use that intersection (another result of poor ACT Labor planning).

Ashley Drive duplication is to get a whole bunch of unwanted traffic lights too 🙁 AND they still can’t find the money to finish the last 100 metres of it, despite there being bucket loads for other things . . .

Is this the same Ashley Drive Extension that the Government has been promising and re-announcing for over a decade, but still never actually building????

The single lane main road gets something like 24,000 cars a day and is a crazy mix of slow and fast cars pulling in and out of it.

We just caught the tram (impossible to go shopping in) to Cosco in Docklands. Casting my eye at all the customers coming up from the car park reminds me of the joke about the sign you see outside all Coscos:

“Must be wider than this to ride”.

miz said :

Mysteryman said :

I see they’re already working on the pathetic solution to the Barton Hwy/Gundaroo Road roundabout. How many traffic lights, 9? All because $30m was too expensive for the correct solution – a flyover. What a stupid decision that was. Perhaps if they hadn’t recurring, increasing budget deficits in the area of $400m-$600m (which started well before the Mr Fluffy loan) they would have had the money to spend on doing the job properly. Seems like it should be a priority considering the sheer volume of people that use that intersection (another result of poor ACT Labor planning).

Ashley Drive duplication is to get a whole bunch of unwanted traffic lights too 🙁 AND they still can’t find the money to finish the last 100 metres of it, despite there being bucket loads for other things . . .

The roundabout and approaches to the intersection of Ashley Drive and Erindale Drive is again so overgrown with African Love Grass that it is almost impossible to see traffic approaching from the right.
They need lawnmowers, not traffic lights.

OpenYourMind said :

And for Rubaiyat’s benefit, you may well dismiss the notion of autonomous cars, but I note that even the local pollies supporting light rail are looking for trials in Canberra: http://citynews.com.au/2016/all-sides-of-politics-now-pushing-for-driverless-cars/

How does sitting in the back seat of a car fix congestion and massive energy waste and pollution, now let alone 20 – 30 years down the future?

Charlotte Harper said :

But won enough votes to hold the balance of power …

Actually, the Liberals won more votes than Labor or the Greens.
I suppose the fact that the only Green re-elected (one out of four) gave his support to Labor is proof of a resounding victory.

miz said :

Ashley Drive duplication is to get a whole bunch of unwanted traffic lights too 🙁 AND they still can’t find the money to finish the last 100 metres of it, despite there being bucket loads for other things . . .

I think the only thing our road planners know now is “knock the speed down” and “put in more lights!” I see Melrose Drive has a new set and instead of getting rid of a right turn lane is about to get ANOTHER set. That will make four in under a kilometre. And you just know how well they will coordinate…

Most traffic lights in the ACT could safely be turned off outside of peak hour and replaced with Stop or “Give Way” signs.

rubaiyat said :

dungfungus said :

The vague light rail proposal was dependent on Labor winning the election which they failed to do.
Sure, they “formed a government” with a Green light rail junkie but that wasn’t a public undertaking before the election.
It’s really a “Clayton’s mandate” at best.

Really?

Two parties both for light rail get a clear majority?

Not comfortable with this democracy thing are we.

You conveniently ignore that one of those party’s main policy was light rail and they lost three sitting members.
One could say that was an electoral mandate against light rail, to be fair.

Charlotte Harper8:19 am 11 Feb 16

But won enough votes to hold the balance of power …

Mysteryman said :

I see they’re already working on the pathetic solution to the Barton Hwy/Gundaroo Road roundabout. How many traffic lights, 9? All because $30m was too expensive for the correct solution – a flyover. What a stupid decision that was. Perhaps if they hadn’t recurring, increasing budget deficits in the area of $400m-$600m (which started well before the Mr Fluffy loan) they would have had the money to spend on doing the job properly. Seems like it should be a priority considering the sheer volume of people that use that intersection (another result of poor ACT Labor planning).

Ashley Drive duplication is to get a whole bunch of unwanted traffic lights too 🙁 AND they still can’t find the money to finish the last 100 metres of it, despite there being bucket loads for other things . . .

dungfungus said :

The vague light rail proposal was dependent on Labor winning the election which they failed to do.
Sure, they “formed a government” with a Green light rail junkie but that wasn’t a public undertaking before the election.
It’s really a “Clayton’s mandate” at best.

Still in denial about the result of the last election I see.

gooterz said :

Early Elections!!!!!!

ACT has fixed terms, hence no early elections.

OpenYourMind10:56 pm 10 Feb 16

And courtesy of CanTheTram, Canberra Times is reporting Mick Gentleman is heading on an international tram ‘fact finding’ mission. Try to convince me that this white elephant won’t financially cripple this city. If I was an ACT Public Servant with unfunded super, I’d be starting to get a little nervous about now:

Here we go again. Another fact finding mission (presumably partly paid for by the taxpayer) is set to roam the globe in search of notoriously hard to find evidence in support of the ACT Government’s Great Light Rail Adventure. This time they’re off to North America. Wonder if they’ll stop by Springfield, Brockway, North Haverbrook, and Ogdenville to see what happens when small cities listen to salesmen instead of reason and build mass transit?
The sad fact is, in North America no city as small and low density as Canberra has built light rail. Why? Because the rest of the world appears to have discovered that light rail just is not a viable solution for cities such as ours. The population is too small and spread out, the tax base is too small, and the costs per head of population are too prohibitive compared to alternatives, which deliver the same public transport benefits for a fraction of the price.
No amount of fact finding missions to large cities, fluffy urban planning reports and optimistic artists’ impressions will alter the fact that Canberra is pretty much doing what no city similar to ours has done before.

OpenYourMind10:41 pm 10 Feb 16

And for Rubaiyat’s benefit, you may well dismiss the notion of autonomous cars, but I note that even the local pollies supporting light rail are looking for trials in Canberra: http://citynews.com.au/2016/all-sides-of-politics-now-pushing-for-driverless-cars/

So Truthiness…

What would we do without easy to reach for repetition of anything that anyone else says that we like the sound of. Something that has that comforting familiarity that pours over you like a mothers kiss. Familiar and affirming, just is, no doubts, no tedious and difficult research, no simple examination of what is in front of you and easily observable, When you KNOW! who needs to check?

The whole enormous field of people’s fear of ever letting go of the nonsense that they dress up their lives with in case it all turns out be all nonsense, is an endless fascination for me.

Today chatted to a scientologist So wanted ask what him what he thought of Canberra’s Light Rail or what the Trillion year old Thetans’ revealed to R. L. Hunbard about the “trillion dollar” Canberra Light Rail.

LOF said :

Generally I think the Labor government have done a good job for Canberra but I’m not in agreement with them on light rail. I find it hard to believe there will be the critical mass necessary to make this project a success or to justify it. It is commonsense to assume I think, that use of the line will be limited to those who are in spitting distance of it and who will use it and maybe the occasional use for big events on the northside.

Instead why havn’t we seen any progression of the fast train between Sydney and Canberra? I can hardly believe I’m living in a first world country sometimes where the only choice is being cooped up like a chicken on the bus or the agonizingly slow train. A fast train would bring huge benefits to the economy in the ACT and would be much more widely used than light rail. But I guess the kicker is that it would require agreement and cooperation with state and federal partners and we all know how that usually ends up.

Oh Yes !

Mysteryman said :

wildturkeycanoe said :

In a CT article dated October 14 2012,yes Labor did promise to “plan, finance and develop the first stage of a Light Rail Network”, but with a costing estimate of $30million. There were no figures of near a billion dollars mentioned because they had no idea what it would cost. Neither did the voters, who may have ticked a different box had they been aware of the impact on rates to pay for it. Any party can make promises of gold plated highways to win votes, but until actual costs are made public that is deception.
They also promised to “Upgrade and duplicate Ashley Drive between Erindale Drive and Johnson Drive – $19.6 million”. That cost has now blown out to $24.6 million, a mere 8%. What of the billion dollar tram, will it also need an extra 80 million or more before completion?
They promised to “Encourage and reward good drivers by providing a 20 per cent discount on licence renewals”, yet we see in the new budget a 3% rise in renewals instead.
Belconnen High was promised 28 million for upgrades, but they only got 18mill in the new budget.
Hospital beds budgets were slashed from $60 mill at Calvary, to only $40 million across all hospitals.

Can they be trusted to deliver on this tram project with figures quoted? I seriously doubt it.
Broken promises need be pointed out so that voters can decide who to trust in the next term of government. What else have Labor reneged on?

I see they’re already working on the pathetic solution to the Barton Hwy/Gundaroo Road roundabout. How many traffic lights, 9? All because $30m was too expensive for the correct solution – a flyover. What a stupid decision that was. Perhaps if they hadn’t recurring, increasing budget deficits in the area of $400m-$600m (which started well before the Mr Fluffy loan) they would have had the money to spend on doing the job properly. Seems like it should be a priority considering the sheer volume of people that use that intersection (another result of poor ACT Labor planning).

Very much in agreement with you on most things here mysteryman. Just not about the political party stuff. I don’t think it would make any difference which party was in at this point in time, the planning would still be piss-poor.
There is no-one in government or in the beaurocracy who actually has hands-on practical skills & training. It’s kind of like having a head of the fire department with no fire-fighting experience! (Which of course we have had, haven’t we?) It’s just that it is actually happening all across government.
Won’t it be great when we can do it once, do it well and not have to do a patch job.

rubaiyat said :

So the “fiscally responsible” opposition will show us how that is done by canceling the contract at any cost?

Didn’t they also say this would cost billions, or was that billions with them in charge?

Rubaiyat,

The place where the irresponsibility lies is in signing contracts, knowing that there is great disunity in the community as to how public transport needs can best be met in the 21st century.

I think the other place where irresponsibility lies is in not researching all the transport options that are available to suit the needs of this growing city. Canberra is not designed like Sydney or Melbourne or Brussells. We have to design a solution that is appropriate for here.

Individual egos should not be what this is about. But I think it has become that.

Very sad for the whole of the ACT.

I’m not comfortable with this whole Canberra thing. I’m not sure there ever will be a critical mass of people willing to move to desolate sheep paddocks in cold windswept southern NSW.

But moving along from the expert far sighted analysis, what alternative is there? The billion dollar busway that will cost a billion dollars and no-one will ever ride on despite it costs a billion dollars and will probably have a billion dollar over run that will add a billion dollars to the billion dollar cost and will bankrupt the ACT because we don’t have a billion dollars that the busway will cost let alone the billion dollar study into why everyone knows it will cost a billion dollars by saying it over and over a billion times.

You can quote me on that. Just mention a billion and everyone will know exactly what you are talking about.

But. Shhhhhh, don’t mention the multi billions the roads and cars cost. Those are different billions. They’re not the pretend ones. They are real, pretended away.

dungfungus said :

The vague light rail proposal was dependent on Labor winning the election which they failed to do.
Sure, they “formed a government” with a Green light rail junkie but that wasn’t a public undertaking before the election.
It’s really a “Clayton’s mandate” at best.

Really?

Two parties both for light rail get a clear majority?

Not comfortable with this democracy thing are we.

HiddenDragon7:16 pm 10 Feb 16

The mandate argument regarding light rail might be more relevant, and persuasive now, if light rail – rather than stamp duty/rates, or “is Katy nicer than Zed” – had been THE issue at the 2012 Territory election.

Likewise, it would be more persuasive if politicians were renowned for unfailingly carrying out all of their election promises to the letter – in which case we could reasonably assume that many, if not all, of the people who voted for Labor/Green candidates in 2012 had reflected on the light rail policy and either supported it, or were not so opposed to it as to change their vote.

OpenYourMind7:08 pm 10 Feb 16

This is a 700million dollar+ commitment plus 30 years of ongoing cost. Surely we can hold out til the end of the year before locking us in. The case for a mandate at last election is flimsy at best, if the ACT population doesn’t vote liberal this time, then so be it, open up our rates wallets and fleece us like we deserved it.

Mysteryman said :

wildturkeycanoe said :

In a CT article dated October 14 2012,yes Labor did promise to “plan, finance and develop the first stage of a Light Rail Network”, but with a costing estimate of $30million. There were no figures of near a billion dollars mentioned because they had no idea what it would cost. Neither did the voters, who may have ticked a different box had they been aware of the impact on rates to pay for it. Any party can make promises of gold plated highways to win votes, but until actual costs are made public that is deception.
They also promised to “Upgrade and duplicate Ashley Drive between Erindale Drive and Johnson Drive – $19.6 million”. That cost has now blown out to $24.6 million, a mere 8%. What of the billion dollar tram, will it also need an extra 80 million or more before completion?
They promised to “Encourage and reward good drivers by providing a 20 per cent discount on licence renewals”, yet we see in the new budget a 3% rise in renewals instead.
Belconnen High was promised 28 million for upgrades, but they only got 18mill in the new budget.
Hospital beds budgets were slashed from $60 mill at Calvary, to only $40 million across all hospitals.

Can they be trusted to deliver on this tram project with figures quoted? I seriously doubt it.
Broken promises need be pointed out so that voters can decide who to trust in the next term of government. What else have Labor reneged on?

I see they’re already working on the pathetic solution to the Barton Hwy/Gundaroo Road roundabout. How many traffic lights, 9? All because $30m was too expensive for the correct solution – a flyover. What a stupid decision that was. Perhaps if they hadn’t recurring, increasing budget deficits in the area of $400m-$600m (which started well before the Mr Fluffy loan) they would have had the money to spend on doing the job properly. Seems like it should be a priority considering the sheer volume of people that use that intersection (another result of poor ACT Labor planning).

I think you’re confusing the “correct” solution with the most expensive solution.

You may well be correct that the best solution is a flyover but determining that would require a full and robust analysis of the costs, benefits and risks associated with each potential option.

Oh wait, I forgot it was the ACT government I was talking about.

Coe’s response, as well as wildturkeycanoe’s, is a joke right? As in most things related to politics, straw man arguments are used extensively, to the detriment of the public and to the detriment of the credibility of those who use them. If the CEO of a public company made such misleading statements to the market, you’d see them copping a significant civil penalty as well as risk a stint in the big house.

“Prior to the 2012 ACT Election the Labor Party took a $30 million commitment to Canberrans for concept and design work on light rail. That’s all”.

It says $614 million in the policy statement. $30 million was clearly explained as an immediate commitment (most likely to be funded from the next budget) to get things rolling. Where else does a government get money to spend except from the public coffers?

Charlotte Harper said :

The only way the election date can change is if the PM chooses to hold the Federal election on the day currently scheduled for the ACT poll, in which case ACT would move to first Saturday in December. In fact, one could imagine Labor/Greens lobbying tram fan Turnbull to schedule the clash to give them more time for light rail construction before the election. Not that Prime Ministers make decisions about election timing based on such lobbying, of course.

Not quite.

Given that if Labor win they’ll continue to build the tram. Having an election right now would mean that for the next for years we’ll have stable government to build the tram. If libs win then we’ll save ourselves an armload in exit clauses from the contract.

One way to trigger an election is a vote of no confidence, which if Barr thought “hey I’m going to win government easy, lets get this election out of the way and go sign contracts” he could ask the members to vote no confidence purely to bring about an election. Election being held in March.
We previously had 3 year terms which would have been much better as we would be just coming out of an election and have 2.5 years to govern and build the tram.

Otherwise he takes the risk of going to the election just after signing contracts and everyone finds out how disrupted their lives now are as a result of the construction work planned.

LOF said :

Generally I think the Labor government have done a good job for Canberra but I’m not in agreement with them on light rail. I find it hard to believe there will be the critical mass necessary to make this project a success or to justify it. It is commonsense to assume I think, that use of the line will be limited to those who are in spitting distance of it and who will use it and maybe the occasional use for big events on the northside.

Instead why havn’t we seen any progression of the fast train between Sydney and Canberra? I can hardly believe I’m living in a first world country sometimes where the only choice is being cooped up like a chicken on the bus or the agonizingly slow train. A fast train would bring huge benefits to the economy in the ACT and would be much more widely used than light rail. But I guess the kicker is that it would require agreement and cooperation with state and federal partners and we all know how that usually ends up.

Please name two huge benefits a fast train would bring to the ACT? This is Australia, not Europe or China.

Early Elections!!!!!!

Charlotte Harper2:30 pm 10 Feb 16

The only way the election date can change is if the PM chooses to hold the Federal election on the day currently scheduled for the ACT poll, in which case ACT would move to first Saturday in December. In fact, one could imagine Labor/Greens lobbying tram fan Turnbull to schedule the clash to give them more time for light rail construction before the election. Not that Prime Ministers make decisions about election timing based on such lobbying, of course.

Do the ACT Liberals still have a policy to get rid of the in-bound Barry Drive bus lane and open it up to general traffic?

Charlotte Harper2:32 pm 10 Feb 16

I’ve emailed them to ask and will post reply here.

Charlotte Harper1:34 pm 11 Feb 16

Hi pajs, here’s the Liberals’ official response:

“No, we don’t. Last term we said we’d turn it into a T2 or T3. Incidentally, Labor has just turned a bus lane into a T2 on the Federal Highway.”

I’ve talked to people who remember Labor announcing $30m to investigate light rail, but no commitment to spend many hundreds of millions to start construction prior to the 2016 election. It may have been in the fine print but they didn’t widely advertise that part of it.

On the other hand we have Coe saying it should only cost something like $25m to cancel the contract.

http://canberraliberals.org.au/2015/04/corbell-sells-out-the-act-for-light-rail-contracts/

That was and still is a laughable proposition considering that Canberra’s light rail was and still is scheduled to start construction months prior to the 2016 election, while the Melbourne project had only just been signed. He obviously believes it or he wouldn’t have made the extraordinary commitment to scrap the project regardless of cost. It’s possible that in a choice between a white elephant and no infrastructure at a cost of many millions of dollars, finishing the elephant may be the better choice.

I don’t believe the light rail business case stacks up, with many of the benefits coming to the light rail corridor set to come at a cost to other parts of Canberra and those costs have not been factored into the business case. I also don’t believe that Coe would make a good minister, let alone deputy chief minister for the ACT. I get the impression he doesn’t really understand what he’s doing and having him in a position of power in government could come at a cost that more than offsets any savings on cancelling light rail.

Its a wonderful choice that opponents of light rail will be facing come October.

Generally I think the Labor government have done a good job for Canberra but I’m not in agreement with them on light rail. I find it hard to believe there will be the critical mass necessary to make this project a success or to justify it. It is commonsense to assume I think, that use of the line will be limited to those who are in spitting distance of it and who will use it and maybe the occasional use for big events on the northside.

Instead why havn’t we seen any progression of the fast train between Sydney and Canberra? I can hardly believe I’m living in a first world country sometimes where the only choice is being cooped up like a chicken on the bus or the agonizingly slow train. A fast train would bring huge benefits to the economy in the ACT and would be much more widely used than light rail. But I guess the kicker is that it would require agreement and cooperation with state and federal partners and we all know how that usually ends up.

It’s like ‘Making a Murderer’ – people in power using singlemindedness as a cover for lack of evidence.

The vague light rail proposal was dependent on Labor winning the election which they failed to do.
Sure, they “formed a government” with a Green light rail junkie but that wasn’t a public undertaking before the election.
It’s really a “Clayton’s mandate” at best.

wildturkeycanoe said :

In a CT article dated October 14 2012,yes Labor did promise to “plan, finance and develop the first stage of a Light Rail Network”, but with a costing estimate of $30million. There were no figures of near a billion dollars mentioned because they had no idea what it would cost. Neither did the voters, who may have ticked a different box had they been aware of the impact on rates to pay for it. Any party can make promises of gold plated highways to win votes, but until actual costs are made public that is deception.
They also promised to “Upgrade and duplicate Ashley Drive between Erindale Drive and Johnson Drive – $19.6 million”. That cost has now blown out to $24.6 million, a mere 8%. What of the billion dollar tram, will it also need an extra 80 million or more before completion?
They promised to “Encourage and reward good drivers by providing a 20 per cent discount on licence renewals”, yet we see in the new budget a 3% rise in renewals instead.
Belconnen High was promised 28 million for upgrades, but they only got 18mill in the new budget.
Hospital beds budgets were slashed from $60 mill at Calvary, to only $40 million across all hospitals.

Can they be trusted to deliver on this tram project with figures quoted? I seriously doubt it.
Broken promises need be pointed out so that voters can decide who to trust in the next term of government. What else have Labor reneged on?

Closing the Mugga Lane landfill.

wildturkeycanoe said :

In a CT article dated October 14 2012,yes Labor did promise to “plan, finance and develop the first stage of a Light Rail Network”, but with a costing estimate of $30million. There were no figures of near a billion dollars mentioned because they had no idea what it would cost. Neither did the voters, who may have ticked a different box had they been aware of the impact on rates to pay for it. Any party can make promises of gold plated highways to win votes, but until actual costs are made public that is deception.
They also promised to “Upgrade and duplicate Ashley Drive between Erindale Drive and Johnson Drive – $19.6 million”. That cost has now blown out to $24.6 million, a mere 8%. What of the billion dollar tram, will it also need an extra 80 million or more before completion?
They promised to “Encourage and reward good drivers by providing a 20 per cent discount on licence renewals”, yet we see in the new budget a 3% rise in renewals instead.
Belconnen High was promised 28 million for upgrades, but they only got 18mill in the new budget.
Hospital beds budgets were slashed from $60 mill at Calvary, to only $40 million across all hospitals.

Can they be trusted to deliver on this tram project with figures quoted? I seriously doubt it.
Broken promises need be pointed out so that voters can decide who to trust in the next term of government. What else have Labor reneged on?

I see they’re already working on the pathetic solution to the Barton Hwy/Gundaroo Road roundabout. How many traffic lights, 9? All because $30m was too expensive for the correct solution – a flyover. What a stupid decision that was. Perhaps if they hadn’t recurring, increasing budget deficits in the area of $400m-$600m (which started well before the Mr Fluffy loan) they would have had the money to spend on doing the job properly. Seems like it should be a priority considering the sheer volume of people that use that intersection (another result of poor ACT Labor planning).

So the “fiscally responsible” opposition will show us how that is done by canceling the contract at any cost?

Didn’t they also say this would cost billions, or was that billions with them in charge?

wildturkeycanoe8:32 am 10 Feb 16

In a CT article dated October 14 2012,yes Labor did promise to “plan, finance and develop the first stage of a Light Rail Network”, but with a costing estimate of $30million. There were no figures of near a billion dollars mentioned because they had no idea what it would cost. Neither did the voters, who may have ticked a different box had they been aware of the impact on rates to pay for it. Any party can make promises of gold plated highways to win votes, but until actual costs are made public that is deception.
They also promised to “Upgrade and duplicate Ashley Drive between Erindale Drive and Johnson Drive – $19.6 million”. That cost has now blown out to $24.6 million, a mere 8%. What of the billion dollar tram, will it also need an extra 80 million or more before completion?
They promised to “Encourage and reward good drivers by providing a 20 per cent discount on licence renewals”, yet we see in the new budget a 3% rise in renewals instead.
Belconnen High was promised 28 million for upgrades, but they only got 18mill in the new budget.
Hospital beds budgets were slashed from $60 mill at Calvary, to only $40 million across all hospitals.

Can they be trusted to deliver on this tram project with figures quoted? I seriously doubt it.
Broken promises need be pointed out so that voters can decide who to trust in the next term of government. What else have Labor reneged on?

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.