Skip to content Skip to main navigation

News

Skilled legal advice with
accessible & personal attention

Age a key factor in light rail support

By Charlotte Harper - 19 October 2015 31

Light rail

A majority of older Canberrans are anti-light rail but overall capital residents are for the Capital Metro according to new survey results.

Only 46% of over-65s are pro-light rail compared to 67% of 35-49-year-olds.

ACT Minister for Capital Metro Simon Corbell has released a summary of data from surveys undertaken by Piazza Research for the government showing the level of support for light rail overall has remained steady at 54-56% over the past 16 months.

The full report is online here.

Support for light rail increased to 67% when people knew it was part of a wider plan to connect the whole city with an integrated transport system, the Minister said.

“Light rail helps attract new people to public transport with 61% of respondents saying they were more likely to use public transport if it involved light rail,” he said.

The most recent survey showed 49% of people considered traffic congestion a problem now and 69% believed it would be in the future.

Sixty-three per cent (63%) of ACT residents agreed or strongly agreed that the Capital Metro development will provide a good economic stimulus to the Canberra economy. 

Statistics on the government’s motives for investing in light rail showed 43% believed the move was to upgrade or improve transport options. Twenty nine per cent (29%) thought it was to reduce or prevent traffic congestion, and 24% believed it was for political reasons.

“While there is a very vocal minority opposition to this project it is clear that the majority of Canberrans want investment in a modern, reliable public transport system that will provide for them both today and into the future,” Mr Corbell said.

Each of the Piazza Research surveys contained sample groups of at least 1190 people and were therefore accurate to within a +/- 2.8% margin of error, providing a 95% confidence interval for the results.

The government issued the research after The Canberra Times ran a report on a survey of its own this morning. The Canberra Times survey was based on a larger sample size of more than 7000, but rather than being random like those of Piazza Research, was self-selecting. Visitors to The Canberra Times website chose to participate rather than being randomly selected from the broader population which would include those who don’t access the Fairfax paper’s website generally or didn’t during that period, and perhaps more of those who don’t have strong views on the light rail either way. A self-selecting sample such as this can’t be generalized to the entire ACT population as a random sample could.

Inherent bias aside, the survey found support for the light rail line was at 49% with opposition to it at 47%. Some 4% were undecided.

The ACT Opposition spokesman on transport Alistair Coe pounced on the newspaper’s flawed survey results, saying they demonstrated most Canberrans didn’t support the light rail line between Gungahlin and the City.

“This is despite the ACT government spending $50 million to progress light rail, including a large amount of taxpayers’ money to promote light rail over the last year,” he said.

“The poll also shows that the majority of Canberrans [read: the majority of a self-selected group of Canberra Times website readers] would rather see investment in buses over light rail, with 52 percent of Canberrans [read: 50% of a self-selected group of Canberra Times website readers] believing that taxpayers’ money would be better spent on improving the bus network. This is compared to the 41 percent who support building light rail over investing in the bus network.

“The Canberra Liberals believe that investment in our bus network is the best way to improve public transport in Canberra. Buses provide a sensible low-cost option which will improve public transport services for all Canberrans.

“Investing in the bus network instead of light rail will also free up money to spend in other critical areas such as health and education.

“Overall, the results show that light rail is a divisive issue in Canberra. It is more confirmation that the ACT government should delay signing the contracts to build light rail until all Canberrans can have their say on the project at the October 2016 Election,” Mr Coe concluded.

 

 

What’s Your opinion?


Please login to post your comments, or connect with
31 Responses to
Age a key factor in light rail support
Filter
Showing only Website comments
Order
Newest to Oldest
Oldest to Newst
rubaiyat 8:06 pm 25 Oct 15

Postalgeek said :

rubaiyat said :

Postalgeek said :

rubaiyat said :

OpenYourMind said :

Do you support light rail, yes. Do you hate traffic congestion, yes. Do you realise a tram will add to the traffic congestion on Northbourne Ave….oh 🙁 Do you support light rail, yes. Do you realise our rates are already rising at an alarming rate and things will get worse with light rail, all at a time when this town’s many public servants are getting no pay rises…oh 🙁 Do you support light rail, yes. Will you use it, oh yes. Right, sure you will, like you use the buses now…oh 🙁

Do you support the tram (with cables) yes, do you want the tram to go to more of Canberra, of course. Do you realise those trams with overhead wires can’t do that….oh 🙁 Now….3.2.1. wait for the comment from Rubaiyat. If Rubaiyat got a $1 for every word he blogs blindly in support of the tram, he may well be able to fund the preposterous cost of the tram for us.

Do you hate traffic congestion, yes.

Do you realise more cars will add to the traffic congestion on Northbourne Ave? OH!!!! 🙁

Why are you opposing people getting off the road and using a clean alternative instead? DOH!

Stop using the absolute word ‘clean’. Anything made from modern materials is going to involve byproduct and emission from manufacturing through to trucks hauling away dirt and oils used for lubrication. By all means use the word ‘cleaner’ if you know that there is relatively less waste/emission, but stop saying ‘clean’. Walking in bare feet might be able to be considered ‘clean’, but that’s about it.

Only if you stop using the absolutist term “stop”.

I don’t have to hold my breath standing next to a tram or even raise my voice to speak. That’s clean enough for me and seeing cars churn out 20x the pollution of even the dirtiest passenger rail service the whole issue is a lay down mezzeir for light rail.

Cars are not made of unicorn dust, but whatever they are made of the usual single driver has to leave one or two tonnes of it litering our streets wherever he goes and the roads use many times as many resources as light rail. None of it carbon neutral.

I stand by light rail as absolutely not only being many times cheaper than cars for transport but “Clean” with a capital C.

You may accept your sidewalk coffee sprinkled with break pad dust and aroma blended with car exahaust, I am more particular.

I don’t drink coffee.

And along with that assumption stop making the facile assumption that everyone who doesn’t support light rail as appropriate for Canberra is against low-emission alternative transport as a whole.

Then don’t make the facile assumption that everyone is you, whether they drink coffee or not.

Allow that other people than you will be happy to take the Light Rail to work or simply to catch it up and down the line. If they do they will not be adding to the cars and buses polluting our city. The more that do the less noise, hazard and pollution.

dungfungus 7:25 am 22 Oct 15

Perhaps older Canberrans are against the Capital Metro light rail proposal because they (the older ones) better understand the raw economics of the deal.
Even before the first wheel has turned, Capital Metro has appointed a board consisting of one chairman and eight members who are collectively paid about $450,000 a year for what appears to be rubber stamping whatever the government has decided.
Assuming the average price of each tram ticket is $5 and the initial passenger numbers are 5,000 trips a day, this means that for the first 18 days of each year total gross fare income will be allocated to this function.
In the first year of operation the number of days will be much higher as the board has already been formed and it is drawing salaries so the money will have to be capitalised.
Blind ideology costs.

Postalgeek 9:35 am 21 Oct 15

rubaiyat said :

Postalgeek said :

rubaiyat said :

OpenYourMind said :

Do you support light rail, yes. Do you hate traffic congestion, yes. Do you realise a tram will add to the traffic congestion on Northbourne Ave….oh 🙁 Do you support light rail, yes. Do you realise our rates are already rising at an alarming rate and things will get worse with light rail, all at a time when this town’s many public servants are getting no pay rises…oh 🙁 Do you support light rail, yes. Will you use it, oh yes. Right, sure you will, like you use the buses now…oh 🙁

Do you support the tram (with cables) yes, do you want the tram to go to more of Canberra, of course. Do you realise those trams with overhead wires can’t do that….oh 🙁 Now….3.2.1. wait for the comment from Rubaiyat. If Rubaiyat got a $1 for every word he blogs blindly in support of the tram, he may well be able to fund the preposterous cost of the tram for us.

Do you hate traffic congestion, yes.

Do you realise more cars will add to the traffic congestion on Northbourne Ave? OH!!!! 🙁

Why are you opposing people getting off the road and using a clean alternative instead? DOH!

Stop using the absolute word ‘clean’. Anything made from modern materials is going to involve byproduct and emission from manufacturing through to trucks hauling away dirt and oils used for lubrication. By all means use the word ‘cleaner’ if you know that there is relatively less waste/emission, but stop saying ‘clean’. Walking in bare feet might be able to be considered ‘clean’, but that’s about it.

Only if you stop using the absolutist term “stop”.

I don’t have to hold my breath standing next to a tram or even raise my voice to speak. That’s clean enough for me and seeing cars churn out 20x the pollution of even the dirtiest passenger rail service the whole issue is a lay down mezzeir for light rail.

Cars are not made of unicorn dust, but whatever they are made of the usual single driver has to leave one or two tonnes of it litering our streets wherever he goes and the roads use many times as many resources as light rail. None of it carbon neutral.

I stand by light rail as absolutely not only being many times cheaper than cars for transport but “Clean” with a capital C.

You may accept your sidewalk coffee sprinkled with break pad dust and aroma blended with car exahaust, I am more particular.

I don’t drink coffee.

And along with that assumption stop making the facile assumption that everyone who doesn’t support light rail as appropriate for Canberra is against low-emission alternative transport as a whole.

OpenYourMind 10:46 pm 20 Oct 15

rubaiyat said :

Postalgeek said :

rubaiyat said :

OpenYourMind said :

Do you support light rail, yes. Do you hate traffic congestion, yes. Do you realise a tram will add to the traffic congestion on Northbourne Ave….oh 🙁 Do you support light rail, yes. Do you realise our rates are already rising at an alarming rate and things will get worse with light rail, all at a time when this town’s many public servants are getting no pay rises…oh 🙁 Do you support light rail, yes. Will you use it, oh yes. Right, sure you will, like you use the buses now…oh 🙁

Do you support the tram (with cables) yes, do you want the tram to go to more of Canberra, of course. Do you realise those trams with overhead wires can’t do that….oh 🙁 Now….3.2.1. wait for the comment from Rubaiyat. If Rubaiyat got a $1 for every word he blogs blindly in support of the tram, he may well be able to fund the preposterous cost of the tram for us.

Do you hate traffic congestion, yes.

Do you realise more cars will add to the traffic congestion on Northbourne Ave? OH!!!! 🙁

Why are you opposing people getting off the road and using a clean alternative instead? DOH!

Stop using the absolute word ‘clean’. Anything made from modern materials is going to involve byproduct and emission from manufacturing through to trucks hauling away dirt and oils used for lubrication. By all means use the word ‘cleaner’ if you know that there is relatively less waste/emission, but stop saying ‘clean’. Walking in bare feet might be able to be considered ‘clean’, but that’s about it.

Only if you stop using the absolutist term “stop”.

I don’t have to hold my breath standing next to a tram or even raise my voice to speak. That’s clean enough for me and seeing cars churn out 20x the pollution of even the dirtiest passenger rail service the whole issue is a lay down mezzeir for light rail.

Cars are not made of unicorn dust, but whatever they are made of the usual single driver has to leave one or two tonnes of it litering our streets wherever he goes and the roads use many times as many resources as light rail. None of it carbon neutral.

I stand by light rail as absolutely not only being many times cheaper than cars for transport but “Clean” with a capital C.

You may accept your sidewalk coffee sprinkled with break pad dust and aroma blended with car exahaust, I am more particular.

I get that you don’t like cars or lower density living and you have a utopian view different to that which is Canberra now. But there’s a heck of a lot of Canberrans who are very content with what we have now. Some of these Canberrans are very middle of the road, have a 3 or 4 beddy house, a couple of cars and a pretty reasonable commute. This hasn’t changed dramatically in the past 30 or 40 years and isn’t about to radically shift now. Sure, Gunghalin has some traffic problems, but they can be remedied. The airport had a bit of a traffic snarl and that was fixed. I get that in a big, big city cars end up ceasing to be the solution, but this is Canberra. We are happily spread out and unlikely to quadruple in population any time before technology changes everything again.

Rubaiyat, why are you so scared of new technology? Electric cars, self driving cars & mini buses (not requiring parking infrastructure), capacitor buses, telecommuting, global internet economy, share economy – these are all going to challenge a tram that has a single destination.

rubaiyat 5:30 pm 20 Oct 15

Postalgeek said :

rubaiyat said :

OpenYourMind said :

Do you support light rail, yes. Do you hate traffic congestion, yes. Do you realise a tram will add to the traffic congestion on Northbourne Ave….oh 🙁 Do you support light rail, yes. Do you realise our rates are already rising at an alarming rate and things will get worse with light rail, all at a time when this town’s many public servants are getting no pay rises…oh 🙁 Do you support light rail, yes. Will you use it, oh yes. Right, sure you will, like you use the buses now…oh 🙁

Do you support the tram (with cables) yes, do you want the tram to go to more of Canberra, of course. Do you realise those trams with overhead wires can’t do that….oh 🙁 Now….3.2.1. wait for the comment from Rubaiyat. If Rubaiyat got a $1 for every word he blogs blindly in support of the tram, he may well be able to fund the preposterous cost of the tram for us.

Do you hate traffic congestion, yes.

Do you realise more cars will add to the traffic congestion on Northbourne Ave? OH!!!! 🙁

Why are you opposing people getting off the road and using a clean alternative instead? DOH!

Stop using the absolute word ‘clean’. Anything made from modern materials is going to involve byproduct and emission from manufacturing through to trucks hauling away dirt and oils used for lubrication. By all means use the word ‘cleaner’ if you know that there is relatively less waste/emission, but stop saying ‘clean’. Walking in bare feet might be able to be considered ‘clean’, but that’s about it.

Only if you stop using the absolutist term “stop”.

I don’t have to hold my breath standing next to a tram or even raise my voice to speak. That’s clean enough for me and seeing cars churn out 20x the pollution of even the dirtiest passenger rail service the whole issue is a lay down mezzeir for light rail.

Cars are not made of unicorn dust, but whatever they are made of the usual single driver has to leave one or two tonnes of it litering our streets wherever he goes and the roads use many times as many resources as light rail. None of it carbon neutral.

I stand by light rail as absolutely not only being many times cheaper than cars for transport but “Clean” with a capital C.

You may accept your sidewalk coffee sprinkled with break pad dust and aroma blended with car exahaust, I am more particular.

dungfungus 3:50 pm 20 Oct 15

Charlotte Harper said :

Hi, so I just had a long talk to the research company and will write their response to your questions up as a separate story and post it first thing tomorrow.

Thanks for checking it out – it promises to be interesting reading.
There were some allegations a while ago about people having their cell phone numbers “harvested” when they texted a certain local radio station. The numbers were classified as “for” and “against” the issue being canvassed for comment.
Some callers were later contacted by direct calls from third parties to give opinions on other matters that were predictable in outcome due to the radio station data collected.
There is some good insight in to cell phone polling in the USA at this link:http://www.people-press.org/methodology/collecting-survey-data/cell-phone-surveys/

Related Articles

CBR Tweets

Sign up to our newsletter

Top
Copyright © 2018 Riot ACT Holdings Pty Ltd. All rights reserved.
www.the-riotact.com | www.b2bmagazine.com.au | www.thisiscanberra.com

Search across the site