TransLink Transit Authority – Annual Report 2010-11

[ozbob]

TransLink Transit Authority – Annual Report 2010-11

Available from here --> http://www.parliament.qld.gov.au/work-of-assembly/tabled-papers/online-tabled-papers

[ozbob]

From the Couriermail click here!

Three million fewer trips on public transport in Queensland but State Government denies it's due to higher fares

Three million fewer trips on public transport in Queensland but State Government denies it's due to higher fares

    by: Robyn Ironside and Robert MacDonald
    From: The Courier-Mail
    September 29, 2011 12:00AM

COMMUTERS are shunning public transport, with three million fewer trips taken in the past financial year.

The State Government denies the drop is linked to higher fares and TransLink has blamed January's floods.

But the report shows the biggest decrease was between April and June, with about two million fewer train trips.

It was an even bigger drop than the January to March quarter.

This was despite increased frequency on some routes and 105,000 extra seats.

The annual TransLink report, tabled late yesterday by Transport Minister Annastacia Palaszczuk, shows a plunge from 181.8 million trips in 2009-10 to 178.6 million in 2010-11.

Train trips fell by 2.6 million, and 2.1 million fewer trips were taken on ferries and CityCats, while buses managed an increase of 1.3 million trips.

Opposition transport spokesman Scott Emerson said the 15 per cent annual fare hikes and the scrapping of weekly tickets in January had turned people off public transport.

But TransLink spokesman Andrew Berkman said more accurate collection of data could explain the plunge.

"Go card is providing more accurate data compared with the previous formulas used," he said.

"On trains, one weekly ticket used to be counted as 11 trips. Now we're finding with go card that can mean seven on trains, and three or four on buses."

Mr Emerson said the repeated fare hikes were taking their toll on struggling families.

"The public is paying more but what they're getting in return from Labor is reduced services, increased disruptions, more overcrowding and greater concerns over their personal safety," he said.

Brisbane Lord Mayor Graham Quirk this month urged the State Government to cap fare hikes in response to falling ferry patronage.

Fares are due to rise 50 per cent by 2014 lifting the cost of a single zone trip from $2.65 to $4.04. The scrapping of weekly, monthly and annual tickets has already seen some commuters paying $2600 more a year.

The taxpayer subsidy for passengers on southeast Queensland's buses, trains and ferries jumped by 20 per cent to more than $6 a trip in 2010-11.

This is despite hefty fare rises to reduce TransLink's reliance on the public purse.

TransLink says in its annual report that January's floods and higher borrowing costs meant the State Government had to increase it subsidy by $161.2 million, to $1.1 billion.

This meant that despite a 15 per cent increase in bus, train and ferry fares in January, ticket revenue covered only 22.5 per cent of TransLink's costs, compared with 24 per cent in the previous year.

And that meant the taxpayer subsidy jumped from $5.05 in 2009-10 to $6.06 in 2010-11.

TransLink says improved fare-evasion strategies have saved $5 million.

[ozbob]

Sent to all outlets:

29th September 2011

SEQ: Urgent actions needed with public transport ticketing

Greetings,

Patronage on public transport is falling as a result of a poor fare structure.  Importantly the relative fare box is falling as well.

It is obvious that a revamped fare structure is needed.

See  TransLink Transit Authority – Annual Report 2010-11

Available from here --> http://www.parliament.qld.gov.au/work-of-assembly/tabled-papers/online-tabled-papers

Best wishes
Robert

Robert Dow
Administration
admin@backontrack.org
RAIL Back On Track http://backontrack.org


===========================

Media release 22 September 2011 re-released 29 September 2011

SEQ: Urgent actions needed with public transport ticketing

RAIL Back On Track (http://backontrack.org) a web based community support group for rail and public transport and an advocate for public transport passengers has again called for urgent actions to address the conditions of use of the go card, actions to improve the fare structure and for improvements in the go card equipment (1).

Robert Dow, Spokesman for RAIL Back On Track said:

"The recent Brisbane Exhibition public transport ticketing meltdown was a turning point. It is unacceptable to pretend all is well with the present ticketing system on our public transport.  Recent feedback to Brisbane media has again indicated that there is a significant proportion of users that are having real issues with the go card (1).  If they abandon the go card they are punished with high cost time limited paper single tickets as the only general option."

"The conditions of use for the go card need expansion (2). Suggested improvements are listed below."

"The fare structure needs an overhaul.  Better incentives for maximising public transport use, particularly out of peak are needed."

"Equipment that is difficult to use because of moisture, glare, poor positioning and inaudible beeps needs fixing.  The pilot readers on trial at Oxley are certainly better than the present readers. These should be rolled out where users are having problems because of positioning of readers at certain locations at a minimum (3)."

"The system software for go card should be upgraded to including the capability of automatically adjusting fixed fares for regular users where there are isolated fixed fares.  This has been recently implemented for the Oyster Card in London, a similar product to the Go card (4)."

"Frankly, the public doesn't want any more 'go spin' what is needed is decisive action today!"

References:

1. http://www.brisbanetimes.com.au/queensland/thousands-fall-victim-to-default-go-card-fares-20110919-1kgey.html

2. http://railbotforum.org/mbs/index.php?topic=6583.0

3. http://railbotforum.org/mbs/index.php?topic=4314.0

4. http://railbotforum.org/mbs/index.php?topic=6690.0

Contact:

Robert Dow
Administration
admin@backontrack.org
RAIL Back On Track http://backontrack.org


Suggested conditions of use for go card

The go card system is dependent on technology but we recognise that sometimes it fails.  Go card users are assured that providing they are using their go card in good faith, they do not have to fear that they will be regarded as a fare evader and warned or fined should they not be able to touch on in the following circumstances:

1.  You have credit on your card go card or auto-top up is activated.

2.  On a bus or ferry if you are not able to touch on because of equipment failure the driver or crew will wave you on.  Do not touch off when you leave that bus or ferry.  You can travel for free.

3.  If go card readers have failed on your platform of departure at railway station (or concourse as appropriate) you can travel for your trip for free. Do not touch off at the completion of your trip.

4.  If your go card fails, the bus driver or crew person will take the number of your go card. You are permitted to complete your journey for free but you need to take steps to obtain a new go card.  A central register of failed go card numbers is maintained and if you continue to use a failed go card you may be warned or fined.  If unable to touch on at railway station because of a go card failure complete your journey, but obtain a new go card.  If you pass through an attended fare gate the railway staff will take note of your go card number.

5.  It is not possible to list all the other miscellaneous causes of a go card touch failure, however providing you have credit on your go card and/or auto-topup activated and you are acting in good faith, you are permitted to complete your journey.

6.  If you are not able to use a go card because of a significant permanent physical or intellectual disability you may be entitled to a TransLink Access Pass.  See --> http://translink.com.au/tickets-and-fares/other-tickets/special-access-passes/translink-access-pass

[ozbob]

Direct download link for the TTA Annual Report 2010-11 --> here!  Large PDF 16.91 MB

[Jonno]

There can be no stronger proof that all the road construction across SEQ is encouraging people to drive more in direct contravention of all state and local plans.  Al levels of Govt are to blame from Clem 7 to Gateway Upgrade to PT fares. They should all hang their heads in shame, admit they all have got it wrong and start a complete reversal of current road centric transport plans.

[ozbob]

From 612 ABC Brisbane Breakfast with Spencer Howson click here!

Public transport trips down but don't expect lower fares

Public transport trips down but don't expect lower fares

29 September 2011 , 8:12 AM by Spencer Howson

Are rising public transport fares stopping you from catching the train or the bus? Perhaps you've decided riding a bike is more economical.

There were three million fewer trips on public transport in the last financial year- but what is turning commuters away from the service?

Matt Longland is Director of Strategy and Planning for Translink and Scott Emerson is the LNP's Transport spokesperson:

[somebody]

There can be no stronger proof that all the road construction across SEQ is encouraging people to drive more in direct contravention of all state and local plans.  Al levels of Govt are to blame from Clem 7 to Gateway Upgrade to PT fares. They should all hang their heads in shame, admit they all have got it wrong and start a complete reversal of current road centric transport plans.

Perhaps so, but I think they have correctly read what the people want and that is more roads and more parking.

[ozbob]

Perhaps so, but I think they have correctly read what the people want and that is more roads and more parking.

Disagree, if you push folks off public transport through a combination of a poor fare structure and pathetic frequency,  and back on to roads, this is the shallow perception.

People do not want to run the gauntlet of congestion, trauma and costs, but they have little alternative.  More enlightened jurisdictions change behaviours by showing leadership, courage and committment.  Something missing in the political landscape of Queensland.

[Stillwater]

Almost all voters drive.  A smaller number catch public transport.  The trick is in convincing vote-hungry politicians that an investment in PT indirectly is an investment in roads because more bums on trains and buses frees up the traffic lane congestion, often at a cost less than adding an extra lane.

[somebody]

More enlightened jurisdictions change behaviours by showing leadership, courage and committment.  Something missing in the political landscape of Queensland.

The culture is different here.

[somebody]

p39 does commit to the 14% PT use target by 2031.  Which is good.  Although it then goes on to say that most of the growth is expected in peak.

I have to wonder if they can get to the suggested 288mil trips by 2018 with only peak time improvements??  Also, will we have CRR by then?

[ozbob]

That is the Draft Connecting SEQ 2031 target, which is under review.  How can most growth occur in peak??  There will a lot more off peak growth than they realise, road traffic is already a congestion issue 7 days a week ...

[somebody]

That is the Draft Connecting SEQ 2031 target, which is under review.  How can most growth occur in peak??  There will a lot more off peak growth than they realise, road traffic is already a congestion issue 7 days a week ...

Yes, I suppose it isn't really a promise or commitment to the 14%.  There's no guarantee of off peak growth.  There has been little in Sydney for example in spite of quite awful traffic.

However, not targeting off peak growth is sure to miss the 288mil trips.

[Stillwater]

Presumably, the only way to increase patronage in the peak is to extend the peak.  Or does it mean nine-car trains? 

[somebody]

Presumably, the only way to increase patronage in the peak is to extend the peak.  Or does it mean nine-car trains? 

I think it means they haven't thought it through.

[SurfRail]

I'm quite pleased the Gold Coast is sitting on a goal of 15% - hardly earth-shattering, but for a regional city with some decent infrastructure coming we might actually be in a position to get there and even exceed it.  The shift is going to be a lot more marked here than in Brisbane even if both cities meet their goals (4.5% to 15% v I think around 10% to 20%).

[ozbob]

Sent to all outlets:

30th September 2011

TransLink Annual Report and On Time Bus Performance reporting

Greetings,

I have major concerns with the accuracy of bus ontime performance as reported in the TransLink Transit Authority – Annual Report 2010-11.

(See page 60  TransLink Transit Authority – Annual Report 2010-11 http://translink.com.au/resources/about-translink/reporting-and-publications/2010-11-annual-report.pdf )

Even taking into account the different definitions of ontime running, viz:

Bus:  Within six minutes (after) or two minutes (before) the scheduled arrival time,

Trains: Less than four minutes (before or after) the scheduled arrival times on all lines except
Gold Coast and Sunshine Coast, where the benchmark is within six minutes,

it is not in tune with reality.

Trains don't run early, if they are they are held.  So the definition for trains is a ruse as well.

To report that bus ontime performance is around 95% is in my opinion not correct.  Train ontime performance is reported as around 93%, that I believe is an accurate measure.

How can buses achieve 95% ontime performance on the road and congested busway network, with constant delays, no shows and full buses?  Feedback to the media, our own experiences and observations, and public feedback suggests that bus ontime performance is around 80% at best.

Questions need to be asked as to why TransLink is allowed to continually report this misleading performance characteristic.
I have been informed by sources that one of the causes of its inaccuracy is that only very small sample sizes are used, and obviously operators are inclined to put forward 'best samples' and much of it is based on self reporting.

Unfortunately this absurd bus ontime performance statistic makes one question the worth of the whole report.

Best wishes
Robert

Robert Dow
Administration
admin@backontrack.org
RAIL Back On Track http://backontrack.org

[ozbob]

From the Queensland Times click here!

TransLink owns up to bus shake-up

TransLink owns up to bus shake-up

Zane Jackson | 30th September 2011

OFFICIALS behind the decision to introduce the bungled FlexiLink taxi service to parts of Ipswich have admitted their community consultation was not effective.

The service was introduced last year to replace axed bus routes, but a 12-month trial was cut short in some suburbs after patrons widely-condemned the service.

TransLink identified community consultation problems in its 2010-2011 annual report, which also revealed a year-on-year drop in train patronage across south-east Queensland.

TransLink's Director of Strategy and Planning Sally Stannard said in the report that "it's fair to say that we learnt a lot about how we could improve our consultation processes from this experience".

"While overall the changes were welcomed by the community, some customers did identify concerns about the new FlexiLink services introduced in parts of Ipswich," she said.

"Unfortunately our consultation on this service change did not identify these concerns until shortly before the implementation."

North Ipswich resident Louise Fullarton, who helped organise public meetings protesting against FlexiLink, said public feedback before the service's introduction should have carried more weight.

"They don't have any consideration for people. Why does it take them so long to figure these things out?" she said.

The service continues in other Ipswich suburbs.

It has been well received by Karalee residents, who didn't have a bus service before hand, while its effectiveness in Goodna and other eastern suburbs is under review. The report also showed public transport patronage dropped from 181.8 million in 2009-10, down to 178.6 million last financial year.

January's floodswere pinpointed by TransLink as a reason for the drop in patronage.

But the LNP and Robert Dow, from commuter advocate group Rail Back on Track, said increasing fares were also driving people away. Mr Dow said better incentives are needed to increase public transport use, particularly out of peak periods.

Stats that count

    178.6 million used public transport in the 2010-2011 financial year.
    That was down from 181.8 million from the previous financial year.
    Trains were on time 93.07% of the time, with buses running at 98.09%.

[ozbob]

Sent to all outlets:

30th September 2011

Re: TransLink Annual Report and On Time Bus Performance reporting

Greetings,

Check out the PTA in WA  --> http://www.pta.wa.gov.au/Portals/0/annualreports/2010/audited-key-performance-indicators/measuring-performance/index.html

Here reported are realistic and obviously accurate ontime performance results  for bus and trains.

Bus around 85%, trains 95%.

Best wishes
Robert

Robert Dow
Administration
admin@backontrack.org
RAIL Back On Track http://backontrack.org

[ozbob]

From the archives ...

Letter to the Editor Courier Mail

Published Courier Mail August 10, 2009

The TransLink Tracker report states on-time bus performance is approaching 96 per cent.  How can that be?  Any regular bus user can tell you on-time performance is nowhere near that.

Robert Dow
Darra

[somebody]

Unfortunately this absurd bus ontime performance statistic makes one question the worth of the whole report.

Ouch!!

[BrizCommuter]

http://brizcommuter.blogspot.com/2011/09/translink-annual-report-201011.html
The BrizCommuter review of this years TransLink Annual Report.

[ozbob]

http://brizcommuter.blogspot.com/2011/09/translink-annual-report-201011.html
The BrizCommuter review of this years TransLink Annual Report.

Well put. 

[Golliwog]

http://brizcommuter.blogspot.com/2011/09/translink-annual-report-201011.html
The BrizCommuter review of this years TransLink Annual Report.

I haven't read the report much as I've been busy of late, but my only comment on that is from my understanding, the lack of published QR passenger load survey counts is not Translinks doing, but QR's. I put an inquiry to QR about it once and had one part tell me I could get them if I contacted a certain part of QR, which I did only to have them tell me the first person was incorrect as last they had heard they didn't release them for safety reasons. They were going to look into it for me, but never got back and I never got around to hassling.

Also the argument about 15% fare increase = 15% service increase is a bit dodgey. Services aren't the only things Translink pay for, nor is fare revenue their only income stream (as the whole subsidy thing points out).

[BrizCommuter]

http://brizcommuter.blogspot.com/2011/09/translink-annual-report-201011.html
The BrizCommuter review of this years TransLink Annual Report.

Also the argument about 15% fare increase = 15% service increase is a bit dodgey. Services aren't the only things Translink pay for, nor is fare revenue their only income stream (as the whole subsidy thing points out).

That is true, but the average commuter expects considerable service improvements for their increasing fares. The statements concerning service increase vs fare increase highlight the huge gap between the fare increase percentage and service improvements. The result of this means that commuters are not getting value for money compared to other cities. This increasing un-affordability of public transport and lack of service improvements is driving some commuters back to their cars. More than 75% of BrizCommuter's work colleagues who used to use public transport 3 years ago now drive to/from work instead.

[somebody]

It is interesting IMO that the bus+ferry system is nearly as expensive as the rail system.  While it carries more trips, what about trip-kms?  I understand that rail still carries more trip-kms than BT buses.

[somebody]

http://brizcommuter.blogspot.com/2011/09/translink-annual-report-201011.html
The BrizCommuter review of this years TransLink Annual Report.

Well put. 

I'd agree.  And quite quickly done too.

I think the 15 minute frequency boat sailed with the new Caboolture line timetable.  Unless that is changed, nothing will get much better off peak train wise.

[ozbob]

Media release 3 October 2011

SEQ: TransLink's annual report - good and bad news

RAIL Back On Track (http://backontrack.org) a web based community support group for rail and public transport and an advocate for public transport passengers welcomes the patronage targets in the 2010-2011 TransLink Transit Authority Annual Report (1).

Robert Dow, Spokesman for RAIL Back On Track said:

"RAIL Back On Track refers to page 39 of the annual report which lists an annual patronage target (all modes) of 288 million trips by 2018. While we welcome decent patronage targets, the next paragraph states that most of the growth will come in peak hour! Really?! RAIL Back on Track would like to know specifically how this is going to be achieved when both the Busway and train systems are approaching maximum capacity during peak hour, and 'big ticket' infrastructure items such as Cross River Rail have been postponed."

"Furthermore, there seems to be no concrete action or signs that 15 minute trains in the off-peak will be delivered generally anytime soon. There is undeniable proof from Brisbane's BUZ buses that increasing off-peak service frequency and later operating hours is the 'silver bullet' to increasing both patronage overall and spreading the peak hour load. So why is it so difficult to apply this principle to trains by simply putting more trains on more often in the off peak? Cities such as Sydney, Adelaide, Melbourne and most comparably, Perth (which is smaller than Brisbane!) have managed to do it!"

"So it would seem that this ambitious patronage target is quite unachievable on present policies. Firstly it would need Cross River Rail to be expedited to have the capacity in the rail system to support the growth.  More importantly, the current persistence with the failed fare strategy of 15% year on year price rises until 2014 is causing negligible to negative patronage growth.  This strategy needs to be reviewed immediately."

"The public is losing patience with failures to implement cheap, practical & obvious solutions.  South-east Queensland is headlong into a looming transport failure!"

Reference:

1. http://translink.com.au/resources/about-translink/reporting-and-publications/2010-11-annual-report.pdf

Contact:

Robert Dow
Administration
admin@backontrack.org
RAIL Back On Track http://backontrack.org

[dwb]

Presumably, the only way to increase patronage in the peak is to extend the peak.  Or does it mean nine-car trains? 

I think it means they haven't thought it through.

There has been lots of thought on it.

Are you really surprised there is a gap between target/forecast/delivery??

[dwb]

Unfortunately this absurd bus ontime performance statistic makes one question the worth of the whole report.

Ouch!!

On the whole I actually thought the report to be quite a bit more comprehensive than the quarterly reports and very good reading. Well laid out and easy to understand with lots of information.

I'm not disagreeing that TL needs to implement better contract control with regards to operators' provision of services, on time, kms, passenger numbers etc.

I think if you read between the lines somewhere the report mentions something about moving towards better contract negotiation and evaluation especially with regard to bus contracting... in my mind you'd need to pick several timing points in and outside the city (or along the route for cross town) and measure the compliance of all peak and all offpeak services at these points to the timetable for effective contract negotiation (you'd probably want to know how well you were doing in peak versus out of peak). You'd also then get a more realistic figure of ontime running... of course we all (including Translink) know it's not 98% or whatever, even if you considered all of your peak services running to time... but then again, if you consider how big the window for OTR is currently (8mins) then you'd basically never get a BUZ running late. And if you only consider one location for the time measure, then that bus can leave early and pass much of the route early before arriving at the timing stop "on time".

The methodology is dodge, we all know that, perhaps rather than say it's boll*cks we could make some suggestions as to how OTR could/should be measured?

And surely their real time information project will help them implement such a system where they can judge the proportion of each scheduled service that is travelled within its on time defined window?

[Golliwog]

The other thing is, do bus drivers know when the timeliness of their route is being auditted? If so, then thats a bit of a fail.

[#Metro]

Quote from: Simon on September 29, 2011, 09:27:37 PM
Quote from: Stillwater on September 29, 2011, 09:20:14 PM
Presumably, the only way to increase patronage in the peak is to extend the peak.  Or does it mean nine-car trains?
I think it means they haven't thought it through.

There has been lots of thought on it.

Are you really surprised there is a gap between target/forecast/delivery??

Hahahahahahahahhaah 

Let's see 9 car trains--- that would have to go on order what... NOW for that to work, and then platforms would have to be
extended... whoops, no money allocated for that though. Oh well.

Extending the peak- that's what looks like what will happen but that is the recipe for Melbourne style disaster and one very
P***sed off electorate...

Busway won't cut it either- whole thing is jammed and as of late even I'm noticing pileups at bus stops like Griffith Uni/CC/etc

[O_128]

Quote from: Simon on September 29, 2011, 09:27:37 PM
Quote from: Stillwater on September 29, 2011, 09:20:14 PM
Presumably, the only way to increase patronage in the peak is to extend the peak.  Or does it mean nine-car trains?
I think it means they haven't thought it through.

There has been lots of thought on it.

Are you really surprised there is a gap between target/forecast/delivery??

Hahahahahahahahhaah 




Let's see 9 car trains--- that would have to go on order what... NOW for that to work, and then platforms would have to be
extended... whoops, no money allocated for that though. Oh well.

Extending the peak- that's what looks like what will happen but that is the recipe for Melbourne style disaster and one very
P***sed off electorate...

Busway won't cut it either- whole thing is jammed and as of late even I'm noticing pileups at bus stops like Griffith Uni/CC/etc

Even just eliminating the akward gap that exists at the moment on peak timetables where peak ends and the next train is in half an hour, stepping down 15 min frequency till around 9 30 would benefit a lot of people.

[somebody]

Presumably, the only way to increase patronage in the peak is to extend the peak.  Or does it mean nine-car trains? 

I think it means they haven't thought it through.

There has been lots of thought on it.

I call crap.  There may have been a lot of thought, but I do not believe that they could have made such a forecast without making incorrect assumptions.

Are you really surprised there is a gap between target/forecast/delivery??

No, of course not.

Got to say, I fully agree with colinw that I am underwhelmed by your defence of the indefensible, while in other breaths you call the 374 a useless route.  It's not the only one.

[dwb]

I call crap.  There may have been a lot of thought, but I do not believe that they could have made such a forecast without making incorrect assumptions.

I think simply the word forecast is being misconstrued... I think it is more like the demand they think they will have, which is part of the arguement to get more funds to be able to deliver to match, rather than a target for delivery under current operating and infrastructure scenarios.

Are you really surprised there is a gap between target/forecast/delivery??

No, of course not.

Then what's your problem?

Got to say, I fully agree with colinw that I am underwhelmed by your defence of the indefensible, while in other breaths you call the 374 a useless route.  It's not the only one.

Defence of the indefensible, blah blah everyone on here is already well aware of my perspectives and that I am highly critical of those things that I think deserve to be criticised. I do not believe in blanket assertions that an entire organisation is entirely worthless.

I am however critical of the $28.79m that was spent on park and rides in 2010-11, for 1264 car spaces that is 23,000 per car space, cheaper than multilevel but still a figure that makes the figure of $4.725m spent on 88 look tiny, as per the extra spend on bus improvement packages. What is the point of spending 23,000 per customer just for a car space when there are no more actual services provided??

But, I also look at this pragmatically. I doubt highly that Translink are the ones calling the shots here (I'd imagine most of this spending was only allocated for them to spend on p&r as election promises, and if was TL that decided where and how to spend the money I'd think it is probably only so they can defuse the pathetic parking policy that BCC is pushing in the inner city by providing more spaces on the outer edge.

Still my experience with Translink has lead me to the perspective that there are good people working hard and dedicated to the same things as you and I in an imperfect system. I see no reason to revel in negativity and rant and rave.

[somebody]

Agree with your point on parking.

As for my problem, that is that the target is not backed up with policies which make even half the growth in the target plausible.

[dwb]

Agree with your point on parking.

As for my problem, that is that the target is not backed up with policies which make even half the growth in the target plausible.

What I'm saying is that I think you'll find the trip number and trip proportions in the Draft Connecting SEQ are based on projected population and land use scenarios and modelled transport demand.... demand, not supply! There is a HUGE difference.

The policy is then to try and determine a network that can supply enough capacity to meet projected demand. That is not really Translink's primary focus. Translink's focus is to manage the network on a day to day level. TMR is primarily in charge of long range transport planning.

So policy setting (the supply response to the modelled demand) is established more so in Connecting SEQ than in Translink Network Plans for many reasons, especially seeing as CSEQ is multimodal (including roads and cycle/walking) and Translink is not.

Translink is still a government body though, so it is reinforcing the policy direction of CSEQ. Translink and TMR can't exactly have different projections/targets/forecasts and look to be part of the same government can they? They might like to but it isn't all that workable.

One of the major proposed policy/infrastructure responses to capacity constraints across the regional network is Cross River Rail. Every single transport bureaucrat out there I know is pushing that project like hell to get it funded and built as soon as possible. That project alone is key to delivering a significant proportion of that expected demand. It is unlikely that will be by 2018 granted, but the role of the planners is to make it as stark as possible for the politicians who make the decisions. I wouldn't be surprised if we have a full on crisis on the network before CRR is funded and in the meantime to delivery we'll have the implementation of some temporary operating processes that wring a little extra blood from what we've got now. Politicians and community won't really accept temporary solutions until there is a crisis, so don't expect much to change until the realisation hits the community and the politicians.... it's got little to do with the planners - they've been working on solutions for years and years that continually get knocked back, underfunded, half baked and entirely cut or buried, deleted, removed from policy documents - by politicians.

I just really wish the anger of this forum was more directed at politicians, it would seem more constructive to me.

[somebody]

^ I'm going to let my previous post stand as a response to that.

[dwb]

^ I'm going to let my previous post stand as a response to that.

But that is exactly my point, the planners are (and have been for years) pointing out a looming capacity crisis that will seriously impact on our productivity and competitiveness as a region on the global stage, and that is when it is really going to affect our quality of live and livelihood.

The planners are saying the task is huge and growing and we need some serious work done to address it. If the politicians continue to ignore this advice, then it is them to blame, not the planners.

I agree many routes in Brisbane could be highly optimised, but that is still peanuts compared to the task, especially if there continues to be no provision of bus priority on road.

[somebody]

^ I'm going to let my previous post stand as a response to that.

But that is exactly my point, the planners are (and have been for years) pointing out a looming capacity crisis that will seriously impact on our productivity and competitiveness as a region on the global stage, and that is when it is really going to affect our quality of live and livelihood.

The planners are saying the task is huge and growing and we need some serious work done to address it. If the politicians continue to ignore this advice, then it is them to blame, not the planners.

I agree many routes in Brisbane could be highly optimised, but that is still peanuts compared to the task, especially if there continues to be no provision of bus priority on road.

BUZ has shown that even without bus priority there is merit in service improvements.

In a lot of cases, the planners are saying that the task is huge, cannot be done without this new piece of infrastructure, yet when the new infrastructure is delivered then do not take advantage of it.  While some of the blame can be levelled at the politicians as you correctly point out, I cannot imagine that it is the politicians fault that the off peak Nambour trains stop all stations to Northgate.  Could easily have been BH/EJ/NG.  That's just one example, Eastern Busway is another (although I except that they have taken full advantage of it regarding Veolia services).