Skip to content Skip to main navigation

Libs renew vow to stop light rail

Charlotte Harper 18 May 2016 32

Alister Coe

The Canberra Liberals have renewed their vow to stop light rail, describing yesterday’s announcement that contracts have been signed and work will begin on the project next month as “the most arrogant act in the ACT’s history”.

They have also called on the Government to publish the full contract and any sub-contracts in full.

“For years we have been raising concerns about this project which are echoed by thousands of Canberrans and countless financial, transport and economic experts,” Leader of the Opposition Jeremy Hanson and Shadow Minister for Transport Alistair Coe said yesterday.

“People could be forgiven for thinking that the government is trying to blackmail Canberrans. The government has actively worked against the best interests of ratepayers by putting the CFMEU’s and a global consortium’s interests ahead of Canberra families,” Mr Hanson said.

Mr Coe said there were serious unanswered questions about the legitimacy of the contract on the back of a previously existing Memorandum of Understanding between UnionsACT and the ACT government.

“These concerns have also been raised by the Canberra Metro consortium,” he said.

“Given this MOU seems to underpin all procurement, there are questions about the tender process for light rail which must be investigated. Therefore, the legality of this contract is potentially in doubt.

“The Canberra Liberals will stop light rail if we are elected in October. We have made our intentions clear and people can vote accordingly. If we are elected, it is because the people of Canberra have given us a clear mandate to stop this project because of the bad financial, economic and transport outcomes.”


What's Your Opinion?


Please login to post your comments, or connect with
32 Responses to Libs renew vow to stop light rail
Filter
Order
Garfield Garfield 7:50 am 20 May 16

Heavs said :

wildturkeycanoe said :

No_Nose said :

I don’t think they’ll be able to stop it. Which is great, because Canberrans can vote Liberal to get rid of Andrew Barr and prevent endless rate rises, but still keep the light rail if that’s what they want.

On auto-repeat again?

You need to get out of Canberra, rates are up everywhere and the Libs are not promising a rate cut unless they have one for millionaires as usual that they haven’t told us about. Again.

Oh if elected they will stop it, come heck or high water, and the ACT will pay dearly as a result. As for gungahlin, it currently has 2 of the 3 fastest growing suburbs in Australia atm, and the tram will only increase daily movements every year for many years to come still. And those numbers will grow once the buses start running routes that take ppl from 15+ minutes away and put them at a tram stop to complete their journey, which doesn’t seem to be accounted for yet.

In the ACT Government’s submission to Infrastructure Australia, didn’t Bus Rapid Transit deliver the majority of benefits of light rail at half the cost? At $1,655m for light rail over 20 years, there is a lot of scope for the Libs to scrap it and the ACT taxpayer to come out well in front without compromising public transport outcomes for commuters.

rubaiyat rubaiyat 6:36 am 20 May 16

devils_advocate said :

wildturkeycanoe said :

On auto-repeat again?

Ha…ha…ha….ho…ho….ho.

That cracks me up.

It’s the pot calling the kettle black – big time.

Difference is I am on Auto-Correct…

…like now. ????

Mordd Mordd 1:20 am 20 May 16

wildturkeycanoe said :

No_Nose said :

I don’t think they’ll be able to stop it. Which is great, because Canberrans can vote Liberal to get rid of Andrew Barr and prevent endless rate rises, but still keep the light rail if that’s what they want.

On auto-repeat again?

You need to get out of Canberra, rates are up everywhere and the Libs are not promising a rate cut unless they have one for millionaires as usual that they haven’t told us about. Again.

Oh if elected they will stop it, come heck or high water, and the ACT will pay dearly as a result. As for gungahlin, it currently has 2 of the 3 fastest growing suburbs in Australia atm, and the tram will only increase daily movements every year for many years to come still. And those numbers will grow once the buses start running routes that take ppl from 15+ minutes away and put them at a tram stop to complete their journey, which doesn’t seem to be accounted for yet.

rommeldog56 rommeldog56 11:13 pm 19 May 16

wildturkeycanoe said :

On auto-repeat again?

Ha…ha…ha….ho…ho….ho. That cracks me up.

It’s the pot calling the kettle black – big time.

rubaiyat rubaiyat 7:44 pm 19 May 16

No_Nose said :

I don’t think they’ll be able to stop it. Which is great, because Canberrans can vote Liberal to get rid of Andrew Barr and prevent endless rate rises, but still keep the light rail if that’s what they want.

On auto-repeat again?

You need to get out of Canberra, rates are up everywhere and the Libs are not promising a rate cut unless they have one for millionaires as usual that they haven’t told us about. Again.

Masquara Masquara 6:12 pm 19 May 16

I don’t think they’ll be able to stop it. Which is great, because Canberrans can vote Liberal to get rid of Andrew Barr and prevent endless rate rises, but still keep the light rail if that’s what they want.

devils_advocate devils_advocate 4:05 pm 19 May 16

In theory, even if a government is elected by a defined subset of the electorate, it is supposed to govern for the benefit of the electorate in general.
In practice, governments often bestow benefits on those constituents who are most likely to return them to government, or to secure their ongoing loyalty.
This is what has occurred in this case. Unfortunately, while any benefits (such as they are) will be consumed by relatively few, the cost will be borne by all.

justin heywood justin heywood 2:52 pm 19 May 16

A_Cog said :

….those 15,000 people could be actually only 7,500 people using the tram daily for return trips

Of course, unless they’re all carrying hover-boards or magic carpets.

The reality is that only around 7-8,000 citizens will be generating the forecast 15,000 trips (less than 2% of the population)
But I thought the 15,000 figure was scary enough, given the costs.

If Capital Metro’s patronage forecast is correct:

The capital cost for the transport of these lucky 8,000 will have been ~$90,000 each.
The running costs (estimated at $22million per year) will amount to $2,750 each person, annually.

Surely cheaper to but these people a Tesla, each.

http://www.capitalmetro.act.gov.au/__data/assets/pdf_file/0009/655650/Capital-Metro-Business-Case-In-Full.pdf

rubaiyat rubaiyat 1:37 pm 19 May 16

rommeldog56 said :

A_Cog said :

Some caution should be used when analysing use numbers on light rail.
For example, those 15,000 people could be actually only 7,500 people using the tram daily for return trips so are you talking about people or passenger movements?
There is no way the route between Gungahlin and Civic will generate 15,000 people movements daily.

I wonder how many of those light rail passengers will be leached from ACTION bus passengers ??? If projected Light Rail passenger numbers are not reached, it is traditionally the case in such infrastructure projects, that ACT Ratepayers will have to make up any revenue shorftfall to the tram consortia.

A trip is a trip even when you take it in that oh so “incredibly cheap” and “unsubsidised” (ROTFL) car.

About 12,000 people take the bus currently, which the tram is deliberately, not accidentally, replacing and Gungahlin’s population is still growing rapidly, many refugees from the stultifying small mindedness of Tuggeranong.

Add on the extra population in the high rise en-route and it should work out, even with all the belated sabotage by the “The Scientists are all Crooks” Tuggeranong Pensioners.

Just as Canberra sprang from the sheep paddocks of old, despite the lack of imagination and vision of an earlier generation of Jeremiahs, this will be so yesterday once it starts.

rommeldog56 rommeldog56 1:01 pm 19 May 16

rommeldog56 said :

I think it tells me you are wrong. As has been pointed out before, the Federal Government is funding a portion of the costs of the ACT Light Rail development. The Federal funding comes from the asset recycling initiative. ‘About $60m’ was the amount mentioned in October last year:
http://www.canberratimes.com.au/act-news/act-government-to-pitch-canberra-light-rail-to-prime-minister-malcolm-turnbull-for-federal-funding-20151011-gk6lzb.html

You gotta laugh at this sort of spin. The Feds gave the ACT Gov’t some dosh because the ACT Gov’t sold off some assets – about m$400 worth from memory. The ACT Govt nominated that the Feds contribution would go to Light Rail here – they could have nominated other infrastructure projects too. It has nothing to do with any confidence the Feds have in the ACT Light Rail project.

What I was referring to is the submission from the ACT Gov’t to the Feds (Infrastructure Australia) for a capital injection up front to this infrastructure project – that occurred a while back. The Feds rejected that because of the poor benefits/costs ratio of 1 :1.2 and gave funding to the Gold Coast Light Rail project instead.

rommeldog56 rommeldog56 11:50 am 19 May 16

A_Cog said :

Some caution should be used when analysing use numbers on light rail.
For example, those 15,000 people could be actually only 7,500 people using the tram daily for return trips so are you talking about people or passenger movements?
There is no way the route between Gungahlin and Civic will generate 15,000 people movements daily.

I wonder how many of those light rail passengers will be leached from ACTION bus passengers ??? If projected Light Rail passenger numbers are not reached, it is traditionally the case in such infrastructure projects, that ACT Ratepayers will have to make up any revenue shorftfall to the tram consortia.

pajs pajs 11:43 am 19 May 16

rosscoact said :

Im certainly not a Liberal (or Labor or Greens !) supporter, but I think that ACT Libs are more in step with their Federal counterparts than u would think. The Feds would not contribute to the ACT Light Rail project but instead part funded the Gold Coast one. Since then the Feds have thrown mega bucks at other Light Rail projects too – but not that in the ACT. So, what does that tell u !!!

I think it tells me you are wrong. As has been pointed out before, the Federal Government is funding a portion of the costs of the ACT Light Rail development. The Federal funding comes from the asset recycling initiative. ‘About $60m’ was the amount mentioned in October last year:
http://www.canberratimes.com.au/act-news/act-government-to-pitch-canberra-light-rail-to-prime-minister-malcolm-turnbull-for-federal-funding-20151011-gk6lzb.html

JC JC 10:48 am 19 May 16

Masquara said :

Shart said :

steveu said :

gazket said :

Garfield said :

We could have considered this:
http://www.news.com.au/national/breaking-news/13m-skyrail-track-proposed-for-sa/news-story/f9332d14d295f50a0f8940189e5966a0

Coming from someone who is so concerned about the asthetics of a tram catenary wire, I am surrpised you would consider an elevated track an sensible alternative. But i do understand your for anything that isn’t an ‘old’ tram… Including old technology cars and the like.

And I love the picture of the skyway in the link below. Especially the support in the middle of the road. Imagine what would happen if a car, bus or truck hit that!

http://www.adelaidenow.com.au/news/south-australia/extransport-chief-rod-hook-unveils-13m-elevated-driverless-skyway-train-plan-for-flinders-university/news-story/3843458239a66608245c942690ac6afc

Exactly the response I was expecting from you JC.
How many cars, buses and trucks have hit a tree in Northbourne Avenue? What was the outcome.
A car hit a tram in Melbourne earlier this week and the tram was derailed and ran into a house bed room! Surely you saw that in the media.
The pylons are spaced at 50m which is enough to straddle most Canberra intersections. And the system doesn’t necessarily have to use designated transport corridors.
Where is your “vision”?
A lot of catenerys are being removed in Europe as trams are retro-fitted with expensive (but cool and sexy) battery systems. Inevitably, this will happen in Canberra.

Yeah been a few vehicles hit a tree, vehicle comes off second best. Car hit tram yep car and tram came off second best and house, so what?

But hit one of the supports on that system you are peddling then two carriage worth of people could well come crashing down with possible multiple deaths. And what of the aesthetics hey. Shocking, especially the above ground stations.

And PS there are not a lot of systems being modified O/S to go centenary free and having trams retrofitted. Only line I can think of is Birmingham where there is an extension to New Street Station of their very successful line. There their second generation trams were ordered with retrofitting in mind as they knew they were going to extended the line when ordered. Oh the model they use is the CAF Urbos3, the same model proposed for Canberra. The same model that comes OFF the shelf with battery, or the ability to put it in later, with no major retrofitting expense. The expense is the pack itself.

Additionally there are a number of NEW systems and lines being planned that have catenary free operation. Though of course these are sections not complete lines.

Some cities and manufacturers have tinkered with lines that are completely catenary free, but they have not proven to be that successful nor cost effective. So the way to go is catenary free where it is really needed and catenary elsewhere.

Northborne Ave isn’t one such place, and besides it would still be a lot more aesthetically pleasing then the skyrail thingy you are peddling.

The risk of a road vehicle hitting one of the Skyrail supports is no greater than a stanchion being hit and if the power lines fall on a fully loaded tram (fully loaded will be a rarity) more people are could be killed than those in a fully loaded Skyrail carriage.
Why do you have to always examine the chicken’s entrails?

Power lines falling to the ground will cut off straight away. So no danger to anyone there. But a carriage crashing 10m to the ground, not pretty. And who says it won’t be constructed like the Adelaide drawing? Smack bang in the middle of the road.

As for the chicken entrails nice turn of words but don’t think I have a monopoly on that, now so I?

dungfungus dungfungus 10:39 am 19 May 16

nothappyjan said :

DragonRyda said :

Um, only 2% of Canberra lives in Gungahlin? ……. I call BS.

Well spotted Mordd.

Perhaps the poster was referring to the fact that, according to Capital Metro’s own business case (p.65, section 4.3.2.1), just 15,120 people will be using the tram by 2021, (about 3.75% of the population if each to and from journey is counted as a seperate citizen.).

Yes that’s right, Capital Metro estimate that 15,000 people will be using the tram by 2021.

Thanks for pointing that out.

Some caution should be used when analysing use numbers on light rail.
For example, those 15,000 people could be actually only 7,500 people using the tram daily for return trips so are you talking about people or passenger movements?
There is no way the route between Gungahlin and Civic will generate 15,000 people movements daily.

justin heywood justin heywood 9:44 am 19 May 16

DragonRyda said :

Um, only 2% of Canberra lives in Gungahlin? ……. I call BS.

Well spotted Mordd.

Perhaps the poster was referring to the fact that, according to Capital Metro’s own business case (p.65, section 4.3.2.1), just 15,120 people will be using the tram by 2021, (about 3.75% of the population if each to and from journey is counted as a seperate citizen.).

Yes that’s right, Capital Metro estimate that 15,000 people will be using the tram by 2021.

Thanks for pointing that out.

rommeldog56 rommeldog56 9:17 am 19 May 16

DragonRyda said :

Um, only 2% of Canberra lives in Gungahlin? You got a stat to back thatup? I call BS. Also what about the ppl along the line closer to the city. I think those plus Gungahlin is probably closer to about 1 in 4 or somewhere in that region. Hardly an insignificant percentage of the population. And if you aren’t serviced by the tram, then just vote Labor or Greens at the election later this year and they will expand the network, everyone wins!

Also ACT Libs are WAY out of step with their Federal counterparts on this, this should bother people more I think.

If you read the post @ #10 from gazkety, it says ” How does a train from Gungahlin to Civic fix that for the 98% of Canberrans who don’t live on the train corridor ?”. That’s not all Gunners as you interpret. As I recall, that 2% figure is in the 400 metre zone on each side of the tram corridor. .

Im certainly not a Liberal (or Labor or Greens !) supporter, but I think that ACT Libs are more in step with their Federal counterparts than u would think. The Feds would not contribute to the ACT Light Rail project but instead part funded the Gold Coast one. Since then the Feds have thrown mega bucks at other Light Rail projects too – but not that in the ACT. So, what does that tell u !!!

dungfungus dungfungus 8:36 am 19 May 16

Shart said :

steveu said :

gazket said :

Garfield said :

We could have considered this:
http://www.news.com.au/national/breaking-news/13m-skyrail-track-proposed-for-sa/news-story/f9332d14d295f50a0f8940189e5966a0

Coming from someone who is so concerned about the asthetics of a tram catenary wire, I am surrpised you would consider an elevated track an sensible alternative. But i do understand your for anything that isn’t an ‘old’ tram… Including old technology cars and the like.

And I love the picture of the skyway in the link below. Especially the support in the middle of the road. Imagine what would happen if a car, bus or truck hit that!

http://www.adelaidenow.com.au/news/south-australia/extransport-chief-rod-hook-unveils-13m-elevated-driverless-skyway-train-plan-for-flinders-university/news-story/3843458239a66608245c942690ac6afc

Exactly the response I was expecting from you JC.
How many cars, buses and trucks have hit a tree in Northbourne Avenue? What was the outcome.
A car hit a tram in Melbourne earlier this week and the tram was derailed and ran into a house bed room! Surely you saw that in the media.
The pylons are spaced at 50m which is enough to straddle most Canberra intersections. And the system doesn’t necessarily have to use designated transport corridors.
Where is your “vision”?
A lot of catenerys are being removed in Europe as trams are retro-fitted with expensive (but cool and sexy) battery systems. Inevitably, this will happen in Canberra.

Yeah been a few vehicles hit a tree, vehicle comes off second best. Car hit tram yep car and tram came off second best and house, so what?

But hit one of the supports on that system you are peddling then two carriage worth of people could well come crashing down with possible multiple deaths. And what of the aesthetics hey. Shocking, especially the above ground stations.

And PS there are not a lot of systems being modified O/S to go centenary free and having trams retrofitted. Only line I can think of is Birmingham where there is an extension to New Street Station of their very successful line. There their second generation trams were ordered with retrofitting in mind as they knew they were going to extended the line when ordered. Oh the model they use is the CAF Urbos3, the same model proposed for Canberra. The same model that comes OFF the shelf with battery, or the ability to put it in later, with no major retrofitting expense. The expense is the pack itself.

Additionally there are a number of NEW systems and lines being planned that have catenary free operation. Though of course these are sections not complete lines.

Some cities and manufacturers have tinkered with lines that are completely catenary free, but they have not proven to be that successful nor cost effective. So the way to go is catenary free where it is really needed and catenary elsewhere.

Northborne Ave isn’t one such place, and besides it would still be a lot more aesthetically pleasing then the skyrail thingy you are peddling.

The risk of a road vehicle hitting one of the Skyrail supports is no greater than a stanchion being hit and if the power lines fall on a fully loaded tram (fully loaded will be a rarity) more people are could be killed than those in a fully loaded Skyrail carriage.
Why do you have to always examine the chicken’s entrails?

Mordd Mordd 12:29 am 19 May 16

gazket said :

Holden Caulfield said :

madelini said :

Maybe the naysayers and parties need to look at other countries are doing about pollution from vehicles urging people to get onto bikes and trams. http://www.theguardian.com/environment/2016/may/17/how-are-cities-around-the-world-tackling-air-pollution

Canberra cannot just keep adding more and more cars to the mix. There is finite space in North Canberra. Time to embrace the vision.

How does a train from Gungahlin to Civic fix that for the 98% of Canberrans who don’t live on the train corridor ?

Gungahlin to City is a close and easy ride on a fairly inexpensive motorcycle or scooter . You could buy 140,000 $5k retail price motorcycles for $700m . They could be electric as well with such a bulk order.

Um, only 2% of Canberra lives in Gungahlin? You got a stat to back thatup? I call BS. Also what about the ppl along the line closer to the city. I think those plus Gungahlin is probably closer to about 1 in 4 or somewhere in that region. Hardly an insignificant percentage of the population. And if you aren’t serviced by the tram, then just vote Labor or Greens at the election later this year and they will expand the network, everyone wins!

Also ACT Libs are WAY out of step with their Federal counterparts on this, this should bother people more I think.

JC JC 11:26 pm 18 May 16

steveu said :

gazket said :

Garfield said :

We could have considered this:
http://www.news.com.au/national/breaking-news/13m-skyrail-track-proposed-for-sa/news-story/f9332d14d295f50a0f8940189e5966a0

Coming from someone who is so concerned about the asthetics of a tram catenary wire, I am surrpised you would consider an elevated track an sensible alternative. But i do understand your for anything that isn’t an ‘old’ tram… Including old technology cars and the like.

And I love the picture of the skyway in the link below. Especially the support in the middle of the road. Imagine what would happen if a car, bus or truck hit that!

http://www.adelaidenow.com.au/news/south-australia/extransport-chief-rod-hook-unveils-13m-elevated-driverless-skyway-train-plan-for-flinders-university/news-story/3843458239a66608245c942690ac6afc

Exactly the response I was expecting from you JC.
How many cars, buses and trucks have hit a tree in Northbourne Avenue? What was the outcome.
A car hit a tram in Melbourne earlier this week and the tram was derailed and ran into a house bed room! Surely you saw that in the media.
The pylons are spaced at 50m which is enough to straddle most Canberra intersections. And the system doesn’t necessarily have to use designated transport corridors.
Where is your “vision”?
A lot of catenerys are being removed in Europe as trams are retro-fitted with expensive (but cool and sexy) battery systems. Inevitably, this will happen in Canberra.

Yeah been a few vehicles hit a tree, vehicle comes off second best. Car hit tram yep car and tram came off second best and house, so what?

But hit one of the supports on that system you are peddling then two carriage worth of people could well come crashing down with possible multiple deaths. And what of the aesthetics hey. Shocking, especially the above ground stations.

And PS there are not a lot of systems being modified O/S to go centenary free and having trams retrofitted. Only line I can think of is Birmingham where there is an extension to New Street Station of their very successful line. There their second generation trams were ordered with retrofitting in mind as they knew they were going to extended the line when ordered. Oh the model they use is the CAF Urbos3, the same model proposed for Canberra. The same model that comes OFF the shelf with battery, or the ability to put it in later, with no major retrofitting expense. The expense is the pack itself.

Additionally there are a number of NEW systems and lines being planned that have catenary free operation. Though of course these are sections not complete lines.

Some cities and manufacturers have tinkered with lines that are completely catenary free, but they have not proven to be that successful nor cost effective. So the way to go is catenary free where it is really needed and catenary elsewhere.

Northborne Ave isn’t one such place, and besides it would still be a lot more aesthetically pleasing then the skyrail thingy you are peddling.

JC JC 11:13 pm 18 May 16

gazket said :

Holden Caulfield said :

madelini said :

Maybe the naysayers and parties need to look at other countries are doing about pollution from vehicles urging people to get onto bikes and trams. http://www.theguardian.com/environment/2016/may/17/how-are-cities-around-the-world-tackling-air-pollution

Canberra cannot just keep adding more and more cars to the mix. There is finite space in North Canberra. Time to embrace the vision.

How does a train from Gungahlin to Civic fix that for the 98% of Canberrans who don’t live on the train corridor ?

It is irrelevant how many as a percentage of the total population live on the corridor. What matters is how many people live on the corridor and if that is sufficient to justify the light rail.

CBR Tweets

Sign up to our newsletter

Top
Copyright © 2019 Region Group Pty Ltd. All rights reserved.
the-riotact.com | aboutregional.com.au | b2bmagazine.com.au | thisiscanberra.com

Search across the site