Skip to content Skip to main navigation

News

Skilled legal advice with
accessible & personal attention

Barr, Coe in transport war of words

By Charlotte Harper 28 October 2015 71

legislative-assembly

This morning, Chief Minister Andrew Barr issued an entire media release attacking the Liberals over their stance on light rail and public transport ahead of an assembly motion vote on the issue today.

It asked, “Will the Liberals reaffirm their commitment to congestion?” and described the Canberra Liberals as “becoming increasingly isolated with their backward-looking position on transport in Canberra”.

Mr Barr said today presented “a line in the sand moment where the Liberals can either choose to join the rest of Canberra in the 21st century and support an assembly motion in favour of public transport. Or they can vote against it and come clean to Canberrans that they are the party that is hardwired to choke our streets with congestion.”

Opposition transport spokesman Alistair Coe was swift to respond.

“This is a desperate and inaccurate attempt by Andrew Barr to divert attention away from his unpopular $1 billion light rail project,” he said.

“The Canberra Liberals are big believers in a comprehensive public transport system centred on an improved bus system. The MRCagney report released yesterday also highlighted how badly the government has let ACTION languish, particularly since diverting funding and attention to light rail. Since 2011, public transport patronage to get to work has dropped from 7.8 percent to 6.9 percent because of the lack of investment, leading to more congestion.

“Let’s remember on the point of congestion that Andrew Barr’s Green Minister Shane Rattenbury raised concerns about the duplication of Cotter Road. We all know that congestion would worsen if the government had his anti-road agenda implemented.”

Mr Barr’s statement continued, saying the Federal Liberals think the ACT Opposition’s position is “economic lunacy”.

“Their political ‘friends’ at every level reject their position on public transport,” he wrote.

“Unlike the ACT Opposition leader, the new Liberal Prime Minister loves public transport. The Liberal leader over the border is investing in public transport, including light rail, which the Canberra Liberals hate. It’s worth remembering these are the most extreme conservative Liberals in the country. They make Tony Abbott look moderate.”

He said that if the Liberals cared about the city’s residents, they’d support a public transport network that met Canberrans’ needs now and over the next 25 years.

“They will support the reallocation of 1.2 million annual bus kilometres freed up by stage 1 of the light rail network to improve the Canberra-wide bus service; and they will support the government to investigate potential partnership opportunities with the Commonwealth Government for high priority light rail corridors. That’s our plan.

“If they vote against this motion, it’s the clearest admission yet that they have no plan for transport – that they are committed to congestion.

“The message I received loud and clear during my recent trip to the United States was that governments must act early to avoid future congestion problems. It is much harder, more time consuming and far more costly to act when the roads are already congested. We have the opportunity to build an efficient and affordable public transport network for the future of our city. This government will seize it.”

 

What’s Your opinion?


Please login to post your comments, or connect with
71 Responses to
Barr, Coe in transport war of words
Filter
Showing only Website comments
Order
Newest to Oldest
Oldest to Newst
rubaiyat 5:49 pm 05 Nov 15

dungfungus said :

rubaiyat said :

dungfungus said :

The UK and Europe have had traffic jams for many years. It’s a result of poor planning.

Actually its a result of heavy traffic. Where else are all the cars, trucks etc going to go?

Only so many vehicles with just one driver that you can fit on freeways and only so many freeways you can build without totally destroying the cities they supposedly serve.

Every time I read a post like this it reminds me of the classic song “Stardust” – it focuses on reveries too.

Know what you mean:

http://the-riotact.com/psa-wentworth-ave-city-bound-lane-closed/157744

dungfungus 5:01 pm 05 Nov 15

rubaiyat said :

dungfungus said :

The UK and Europe have had traffic jams for many years. It’s a result of poor planning.

Actually its a result of heavy traffic. Where else are all the cars, trucks etc going to go?

Only so many vehicles with just one driver that you can fit on freeways and only so many freeways you can build without totally destroying the cities they supposedly serve.

Every time I read a post like this it reminds me of the classic song “Stardust” – it focuses on reveries too.

rubaiyat 2:27 pm 05 Nov 15

dungfungus said :

The UK and Europe have had traffic jams for many years. It’s a result of poor planning.

Actually its a result of heavy traffic. Where else are all the cars, trucks etc going to go?

Only so many vehicles with just one driver that you can fit on freeways and only so many freeways you can build without totally destroying the cities they supposedly serve.

dungfungus 12:44 pm 05 Nov 15

rubaiyat said :

dungfungus said :

Even the best light rail services are exposed to industrial action:
http://www.independent.co.uk/voices/comment/the-strike-proof-docklands-light-railway-has-gone-on-strike-a6720706.html
I love the reference in this article about Margaret Thatcher demanding that the then new DLR not have overhead wires because that is what the trams in socialist countries have “and Britain was not a socialist country!”

A once in 28 year event, wow! Now THERE’s the problem.

Meanwhile every single day:

http://www.bbc.com/news/uk-england-london-25622364

The UK and Europe have had traffic jams for many years. It’s a result of poor planning.
Meanwhile, in Canberra, we have great roads and no traffic jams thanks to good planning.
We are the envy of the motoring world and not even the not-needed sexy Euro trams will change that.

rubaiyat 12:07 pm 05 Nov 15

Strikes are a business dispute between those providing a service and those paying for it, a company.

I find it really strange that companies don’t demand that other companies do not demand the same lack of disputes, or the compulsory delivery of services from each other.

But then we know that companies, which are not real people, are so much MORE important and “Need” certainty, low prices,low interest, low charges, no or insignificant penalties, legal enforcement of their wishes, special exemptions, subsidies, tax exemptions, circumvented planning, self regulation and above all massive pay rises for their executives, as well as any other mumbo jumbo they can think up that dumb schmucks will fall for.

The biggest in your face hypocrisy is the argument that employees “need” lower wages but employers “need” massively higher salaries to increase “productivity”.

rubaiyat 11:42 am 05 Nov 15

rubaiyat said :

dungfungus said :

Even the best light rail services are exposed to industrial action:
http://www.independent.co.uk/voices/comment/the-strike-proof-docklands-light-railway-has-gone-on-strike-a6720706.html
I love the reference in this article about Margaret Thatcher demanding that the then new DLR not have overhead wires because that is what the trams in socialist countries have “and Britain was not a socialist country!”

A once in 28 year event, wow! Now THERE’s the problem.

Meanwhile every single day:

http://www.bbc.com/news/uk-england-london-25622364

Right up there with that once in 100 year event in Prague you spotted with that one good right eye of your dungers. 😉

rubaiyat 10:32 am 05 Nov 15

dungfungus said :

Even the best light rail services are exposed to industrial action:
http://www.independent.co.uk/voices/comment/the-strike-proof-docklands-light-railway-has-gone-on-strike-a6720706.html
I love the reference in this article about Margaret Thatcher demanding that the then new DLR not have overhead wires because that is what the trams in socialist countries have “and Britain was not a socialist country!”

A once in 28 year event, wow! Now THERE’s the problem.

Meanwhile every single day:

http://www.bbc.com/news/uk-england-london-25622364

dungfungus 10:17 am 05 Nov 15

Even the best light rail services are exposed to industrial action:
http://www.independent.co.uk/voices/comment/the-strike-proof-docklands-light-railway-has-gone-on-strike-a6720706.html
I love the reference in this article about Margaret Thatcher demanding that the then new DLR not have overhead wires because that is what the trams in socialist countries have “and Britain was not a socialist country!”

rubaiyat 10:45 am 04 Nov 15

wildturkeycanoe said :

rubaiyat said :

There is the story of the 3 blind men examining the elephant. One feels the tail and says it is a rope, another a leg and says it is a tree, and the third the trunk and says it is a hose.

Blind men or blind mice? Take your choice, but it really helps to open your eyes, and walk around the elephant in the room.

Did the blind men know it was a white elephant?

Speaking of yourself in the third person?

rubaiyat 10:21 am 04 Nov 15

Rotten_berry said :

Would you support the govt (partially) capturing the land value uplift that the sydney light rail has given you? Otherwise the public spending mostly benifits those within <1 km of the stops, who enjoy property value increases plus the utility of the rail service while only paying ~20% of the costs at the fairbox. Those horrible roads meanwhile provide utility to their entire catchment area.

Yes I would. But I didn’t benefit, I gave up on the useless NSW Labor government and sold the property before the Light Rail finally got up.

The “horrible roads” ruin huge swathes of Sydney. Everyone within smell sight and sound of them has their property values negatively impacted. You can measure it in the difference in price of properties along them and anywhere in range of the noise and smell.

I would say it would be fair to compensate everyone near the roads. The annual compensation in perpetuity growing every year as the traffic gets worse and worse could be charged against the drivers to show exactly the cost of their “convenience” to everyone else.

rubaiyat 10:11 am 04 Nov 15

Rotten_berry said :

This study from 2010 is actually a pretty decent level-headed discussion of trams for Canberra. http://atrf.info/papers/2010/2010_Gordon.pdf

I agree. It’s conclusions pretty well match mine. Done right it will work. Done wrong, like anything done wrong, it won’t.

The only bone I would pick with the report is the over reliance on U.S. examples and the misrepresentation of only 10% of Australians using public transport. The U.S.A. thinks and acts quite differently to Australia on a wide range of issues, particularly on transport and the merits of public projects. In Australia the urban use of public transport is actually around 16% which shows that Canberra’s low 6.8% is an outlier and can be brought back into line.

Related Articles

CBR Tweets

Sign up to our newsletter

Top
Copyright © 2018 Region Group Pty Ltd. All rights reserved.
the-riotact.com | aboutregional.com.au | b2bmagazine.com.au | thisiscanberra.com

Search across the site