Putting Light Rail back on the Public Agenda (Meeting Notification)

Jonathon Reynolds 7 January 2008 67

ACT Light Rail, a collective of individuals interested in stimulating renewed debate for exploring Light Rail options for the Capital Region will be hosting a public meeting this coming Wednesday 12th September.

With the recent announcement of the release of new land for the Molonglo town centre and recent coverage of parking issues in the City /Parliamentary area, the group is encouraging public involvement and hoping to reenergize the public transport debate before the upcoming Federal and 2008 Territory Election.

Meeting Details:

Date: Wednesday 12 September
Time: 19:30
Venue: New Griffin Centre, Genge Street, Civic.

ACT Light Rail has a web-site on which information will become available at the following URL: http://www.actlightrail.info

Concept diagram for a Light Rail network for the Canberra Region. The proposed network could leverage the exisiting rail infrastructure for the initial segments of the network. The network then expands in a staged approach, eventually linking all town centres. Park & Ride facilities are provided strategically around the network allieviating the need for mass parking in the employment centres. 

A concept map for a possible Light Rail network

What's Your Opinion?

Please login to post your comments, or connect with
67 Responses to Putting Light Rail back on the Public Agenda (Meeting Notification)
Pandy Pandy 7:53 am 14 Nov 07

Interesting to read that the Light Rail coalition had 4 federal candidates go to their meeting yesterday. They all supported light rail individually or as party platforms.

So OK guessing (since the candidates are not named) the Greens would make 2. Who are the other 2? Liberals?


Pandy Pandy 10:17 am 22 Sep 07

with the plans to develop the Majura Valley (Canberra Times Saturday 22 Sept 2007) for light industrial, time to think about my idea to have light rail go down the valley?

Pandy Pandy 8:17 am 16 Sep 07

I really should not post via this comment box.

Pandy Pandy 8:13 am 16 Sep 07

RiotACT contriutes to the Sunday Times: again.

The article in todays ST picked up on running old rail cars from the historical museum to Bugendore. It also picked-up the cost of the Adelaide tram extension. You read it here first folks.

Still have not seen any post upon the outcomes from Wednesday nights meeting. 30 supporters and one or too sceptics. Any pollies? Not from the Labor Party?

BigDave, it could happen but not without significant pork barrelling with federal funding. How many votes is there for it in Jerrabomberra and Googong/Tralee?

BigDave BigDave 12:17 am 16 Sep 07

If it ever happens, which I seriously doubt, it won’t be in ours or our childrens’ lifetimes. Why bother spending all that dough on a supposed problem that really isn’t a problem??

Pandy Pandy 6:00 pm 14 Sep 07


Pandy Pandy 5:59 pm 14 Sep 07

With your decions to open the records, I feel you have dug a hole. Maybe you will learn.

All the best for the future.

Maelinar Maelinar 9:08 am 14 Sep 07

Hey that’s bonfire’s email address…

Jonathon Reynolds Jonathon Reynolds 8:17 am 14 Sep 07

You have just confirmed how childish and immature you actually are.

Pandy Pandy 8:10 am 14 Sep 07

Mr Hargraeves: What a Gem!

“We also offered to help Vicki with the development of a Liberal Party policy statement on Light Rail.”

[sorry about the last bad cut and paste]

Pandy Pandy 8:08 am 14 Sep 07

about the potential to do this, including whether we would want to include the spreadsheet as part of our submission to the ACT Government.
Mr Hargraeves: What a Gem!
“We also offered to help Vicki with the development of a Liberal Party policy statement on Light Rail.”

Pandy Pandy 7:54 am 14 Sep 07


Now the Labor Party knows. Confidentiallity. No canvassing of release the genie beforehand

Pandy Pandy 7:40 am 14 Sep 07

Ah Jonathon,

Sorry about your Granddad

LRC has decided to open to the public all previous discussions of the LRC. They are all on the public record now and no doubt have been bot- trawled by the likes of Google. It is a regrettable decision, one that I was not happy with.

Also a factor of my leaving the group is that the LRC has debated and only changed reluctantly the inclusion of the word “could”, that the first line that light rail should be built is to Defense HQ. You can say what you like but I am sure that it will be very difficult for anyone ‘new’ to change that view.

AS you are well aware in this thread, I am on public record (well not totally because access to my alternative proposal requires membership of the LRC) on where and how light rail should be built. It differs from yours and the LRC. I knew that that debate would not have got a fair viewing in the ‘closed-shop’ of LRC. Riot-Act provides a different and wider avenue of debate.

As for theories etc: yes it is now very clear that gcc and LRC have/had the same executive membership and that many of the aims/words on light rail are the same. That is a fact and on public record. And until a couple of days ago I did not know that the ‘executive’ of LRC are members of the current gcc committee. As for being Gungahlin centric, well if LRC executive was more representative of members from all over the region I would not have said that.

Next much more importantly, Damien has breached so many privacy obligations and/or laws by passing on to you and you then publicly disclosing a private email behind him and me. On that point alone I would advise anyone to think carefully of joining the LRC.

Lastly, if you post on Riot-Act be prepared to be challenged as a few others besides me have already done re your plans.

Jonathon Reynolds Jonathon Reynolds 10:43 pm 13 Sep 07

I meant the last line to read:

“So perhaps Pandy, those that live in glasshouses shouldn’t throw stones…. so what are YOU trying to hide?

Jonathon Reynolds Jonathon Reynolds 10:39 pm 13 Sep 07

I have been interstate for the past few days, regrettably attending the funeral of my late 92 year old grandfather. Interesting to come back home to a mailbox full of comments and all the b/s flying back and forth:

Please desist with your half baked conspiracies and incorrect assertions. I’ve read through what you have put up as comments and to put it bluntly you are full of it and need to get a life.

You are either onboard with assisting and promoting Light Rail for the Canberra Region or you are not.

The ACT Light Rail group appreciates constructive input (from anyone), we are not interested in playing games by engaging with “spoilers” and “nay sayers” (categories to which you seem to have neatly pigeon-holed yourself.).

I am involved with several community groups and other special interest organisations around town. I make no secret of my membership of these entities. I’d like to know what your community or special interest group involvement is if any….

Perhaps everybody on RiotACT should be made aware of your own personal aversion to open debate, this will give people an opportunity to spin their own conspiracies about you…

After talking with individuals involved with the administration of the ACT Light Rail Yahoo group I have the following gem from you (shortly before you decided to remove yourself from the ACT Light Rail Yahoo group)


From: "Andy P."
Date: 7 September 2007 6:17:43 PM
To: dchaas67@*******.***
Subject: Re: Messages

Not in the minutes.

Also it stiffles debate.

From: damien haas
To: Andy
Subject: Re: Messages
Date: Thu, 6 Sep 2007 16:25:37 -0700 (PDT)

Yes - it was a decison taken at the last meeting.

damien haas

--- Andy wrote:

> I was checking the yahoo group when I saw that the
> http://groups.yahoo.com/group/ACTLightRail/
> does not require to have anyone signed to be able to
> read any of the
> messages posted. Is this deliberate?
> I know that reading of messages can be restricted.


So perhaps Pandy, those that live in glasshouses should throw stones…. so what are YOU trying to hide?

Gungahlin Al Gungahlin Al 11:25 am 13 Sep 07

Hold on to that Pandy. Stick it in a frame and hang it next to your fake lunar landing conspiracy discoveries.
Thanks for the feedback on our web design BTW.

Pandy Pandy 10:01 am 13 Sep 07

Gungahlin Al,

You don’t have any concept about being at arms length do you?

Yes, with the internet and records being publicly available, you can slip up. Only a matter of time.

Since the original passed motion in 2002 has the gcc cancelled the policy to pursue light rail and be a member of the LRC? If not then it is still official policy and gcc is still a member of the LRC.

Ian has resigned form the committee? Thanks for telling us that. Looks like you and he are using the same source of information: re your submission to the ACT government. And you expect us to believe that Jonathon being a member of LRC has not shaped the thinking and mission of gcc over the years? Gives us a break!

Mark, was a member of the gcc committee from 2002.

Yep you should resign as the honourable thing because you lied.

BTW: I live near Evatt 😉

Gungahlin Al Gungahlin Al 9:43 am 13 Sep 07

Pretty pathetic Pandy.
And what a super sleuth you are – 100% for your ability to look up information on publicly available websites mate! “Caught out”? Doing what? I can just see the banner headlines mate: “Community volunteers conspire to help the community.”

Yes, as I did say above “a couple of Gungahlin people are involved”. Jonathon is involved with the light rail push. What’s that line about walking and chewing gum at the same time?
Ian resigned from GCC after many years of strong contributions, to pursue the light rail issue. Haven’t seen him since the abovementioned meeting, but his contributions are missed. I don’t know Mark – maybe he is Bonfire??

So that leaves you with your “concerns” about the light rail push being Gungahlin-centric. Perhaps you’d care to scroll back up and look at their prioritising in their plan – I see plenty of other areas proposed to be serviced before Gungahlin. Now with Gungahlin hat on, I’d argue that the need there is greater due to the virtual absence of employment and therefore the need to commute out we almost all have. I guess you’d just tease some conspiracy out of that too.

“calls for you to resign” – AGM next month Pandy – see you there – it would be nice to get some personal time back…

Thumper Thumper 7:58 am 13 Sep 07

Start writing to Bob McMuppet and ask him for his views.

After all, he is our elected representative…

Pandy Pandy 12:48 am 13 Sep 07

If your were a politician Gungahlin Al, there would be calls for you to resign.

GCC has nothing to do with the group Quote Gungahlin Al 12 September 2007

So explain this:

MOTION 3: That the Gungahlin Community Council (1) supports the objective of the ACT
Light Rail Coalition to accelerate the establishment of Light Rail as the backbone of the
ACT’s public transport infrastructure; and (2) will participate in the ACT Light Rail
Coalition to work towards the goal of a Light Rail link between Civic and Gungahlin as
the first step towards a larger Light Rail network serving the ACT.
Proposed: Mark Loney Seconded: by Maben Douglass. CARRIED

Ian Ruecroft spoke for the above motion and suggested the Gungahlin Community Council
become a member of the Light Rail Coalition.

Note Ian Ruecroft wrote one of the articles placed on the gcc website.
Gcc Vice President – Ian Ruecroft (seconded Jonathon Reynolds) 2002
Gcc Transport and Roads – Mark Loney ( Lloyd Walker) 2002

Ian and Mark and Jonathen are current members of the coalition.

But wait:

Gungahlin Community Council Inc
Minutes of Special Executive Meeting
Via Email, Sunday, 12th July, 2007
Alan Kerlin has proposed that Jonathon Reynolds fill the vacancy for the position of Vice President. This was seconded by Ian Ruecroft. The motion was carried by a majority of the Executive – Alan Kerlin, Ian Ruecroft, Kevin Cox and John Kelly. Under the terms of the GCC Constitution, as recorded below, Jonathon Reynolds is duly elected as Vice President.

Gungahlin Al, have you been caught out.

What was I saying about the coalition being Gungahlin centric?

CBR Tweets

Sign up to our newsletter


Search across the site