19 April 2016

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

15 September 2014 | Damien Haas

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

Total cost – 783 million dollars.

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

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

This is such wonderful news for the future of Canberra.

A full report is at ACT Light Rails website.

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

Damien Haas
Chair, ACT Light Rail

Join the conversation

141

All Comments

All Comments
Website Comments
Facebook Comments

LatestOldest

dungfungus10:26 am 27 Oct 14

miz said :

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

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

miz10:07 pm 26 Oct 14

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

dungfungus6:31 pm 26 Oct 14

miz said :

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

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

miz9:44 am 26 Oct 14

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

dungfungus12:10 pm 21 Oct 14

mcs said :

dungfungus said :

miz said :

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

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

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

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

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

mcs11:09 am 21 Oct 14

dungfungus said :

miz said :

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

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

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

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

dungfungus8:56 am 21 Oct 14

miz said :

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

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

miz7:20 am 21 Oct 14

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

Redrider7:58 pm 20 Oct 14

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

rommeldog567:32 pm 20 Oct 14

farnarkler said :

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

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

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

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

dungfungus11:14 am 22 Sep 14

pajs said :

dungfungus said :

gooterz said :

dungfungus said :

rosscoact said :

dungfungus said :

rosscoact said :

Sandman said :

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

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

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

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

I hope you have been fined every year.

We don’t have elections every year?

wildturkeycanoe said :

gooterz said :

rommeldog56 said :

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

pajs9:56 am 22 Sep 14

dungfungus said :

gooterz said :

dungfungus said :

rosscoact said :

dungfungus said :

rosscoact said :

Sandman said :

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

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

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

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

I hope you have been fined every year.

We don’t have elections every year?

wildturkeycanoe said :

gooterz said :

rommeldog56 said :

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

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

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

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

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

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

dungfungus8:16 am 22 Sep 14

gooterz said :

dungfungus said :

rosscoact said :

dungfungus said :

rosscoact said :

Sandman said :

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

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

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

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

I hope you have been fined every year.

We don’t have elections every year?

wildturkeycanoe said :

gooterz said :

rommeldog56 said :

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

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

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

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

dungfungus8:46 am 20 Sep 14

wildturkeycanoe said :

dungfungus said :

rosscoact said :

dkNigs said :

rosscoact said :

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

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

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

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

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

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

rommeldog567:43 am 20 Sep 14

blisteringbarnacles said :

dungfungus said :

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

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

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

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

rosscoact8:36 pm 18 Sep 14

dungfungus said :

rosscoact said :

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

What are the expected ticket prices of the Tram?

– about the same as a bus

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

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

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

– see question above

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

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

Why down the middle of Northbourne?

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

– get me as a passenger as a start

You call those “answers”?
More like opinion.

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

dungfungus4:49 pm 18 Sep 14

rosscoact said :

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

What are the expected ticket prices of the Tram?

– about the same as a bus

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

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

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

– see question above

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

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

Why down the middle of Northbourne?

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

– get me as a passenger as a start

You call those “answers”?
More like opinion.

rosscoact1:36 pm 18 Sep 14

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Holden Caulfield11:13 am 18 Sep 14

2604 said :

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

dungfungus10:16 am 18 Sep 14

blisteringbarnacles said :

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

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

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

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

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

Postalgeek10:53 am 17 Sep 14

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

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

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

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

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

dungfungus9:59 am 17 Sep 14

dungfungus said :

dkNigs said :

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

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

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

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

dungfungus9:39 am 17 Sep 14

dkNigs said :

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

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

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

View more conversations

Featured Businesses

Commercial Real Estate Agents

Raine & Horne Commercial

Your business and property is important to us.

Find out more

Insurance Brokers

allinsure

Allinsure has been a trusted insurance advisory to thousands of Australian business owners for almost 20 years.

Find out more

Developments

Ginninderry

A sustainable community of international significance in the Capital Region.

Find out more

Professional Services

RSM

We share skills, insight and resources, as well as a client-centric approach that's based on a deep understanding of your business.

Find out more

Mortgage Brokers

Clarity Home Loans

A passionate team of Canberrans helping other Canberrans secure their home loans. No frills, no commissions, no brainer.

Find out more

Electricians

True Connection Electrical

Since 2014, True Connection Electrical have been servicing residential and small commercial clients with reliable, trustworthy and top-quality electrical work.

Find out more