12 April 2019

RiotACT Face Off: A mandate for light rail?

10 February 2016 | Charlotte

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
Facebook 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.

rubaiyat10:03 am 27 Feb 16

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.

dungfungus11:52 am 24 Feb 16

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.

rubaiyat10:26 am 18 Feb 16

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.

rubaiyat10:05 am 18 Feb 16

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?

rubaiyat9:57 am 18 Feb 16

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.

dungfungus7:55 am 18 Feb 16

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.

dungfungus7:53 am 18 Feb 16

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.

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.

JC11:05 am 17 Feb 16

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.

JC11:02 am 17 Feb 16

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.

rubaiyat9:29 am 17 Feb 16

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!

ungruntled11:59 am 16 Feb 16

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?

ungruntled10:31 am 16 Feb 16

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.

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”.

dungfungus10:46 am 14 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 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.

rubaiyat10:09 am 14 Feb 16

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?

rubaiyat11:53 am 13 Feb 16

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!

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.

dungfungus12:36 pm 12 Feb 16

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?

rubaiyat10:59 am 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”.

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.

dungfungus9:30 am 12 Feb 16

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”.

ungruntled9:46 pm 10 Feb 16

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.

chewy145:23 pm 10 Feb 16

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.

Mysteryman12:04 pm 10 Feb 16

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).

View more conversations

Featured Businesses

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

Lawyers

Kamy Saeedi Law

When you need a criminal or commercial lawyer, you don’t want to take any chances. You want someone in your corner that you can trust like your life depends on it - because it does.

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

Community Club

Canberra Southern Cross Club

We're proud to give you a place where friends and family can come together for good food and great entertainment.

Find out more

Lawyers

BDN Lawyers

BDN has provided legal services to to Canberra, Queanbeyan and the region for over 160 years.

Find out more

Lawyers

MV Law

Through a spirit of entrepreneurialism, collaboration, and future-forward thinking, MV Law have earned an industry-leading reputation.

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

Podiatrists

The Walking Clinic

The Walking Clinic has perpetuated an attitude of excellence in foot health provision. The experienced Podiatric team provide current and innovative care to all patients.

Find out more