21 Aug 2013: SEQ: Bus Cost Explosion Engulfs Brisbane CityCats

[ozbob]

Media release 21st August 2013



SEQ: Bus Cost Explosion Engulfs Brisbane CityCats

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 calls for the break up of Brisbane Transport's local government bus monopoly.

Robert Dow, Spokesman for RAIL Back On Track said:

"Brisbane's Public Transport network is falling further into the 'death spiral' of spin, inaction and chaos. There has been an enormous cost explosion at Brisbane Transport. This is placing huge pressure on TransLink to increase fares and further exacerbates the affordability death spiral."

"The failure to follow through with the TransLink bus review has has led to a freeze in bus driver hiring and services cut across the network (and therefore less driver hours). Had BCC co-operated with the TransLink review rather than refuse on at least six occasions, Brisbane would have got an upgrade to 26 BUZ services, high frequency buses to Yeronga, Inala, The Northwest, Centenary Suburbs and Morningside. None of BCC's bus depots would have had to close, fares could have come down and fare revenue and passengers would have gone up!"

"Instead, $2 million dollars will now be ripped out of the CityCat network in BCC's CityCat Cuts and none of these said suburbs are getting upgraded high frequency services."

"There is duplication and waste within the BCC's bus network itself. One example is the Maroon CityGlider to Stones Corner. Another is the Adelaide Street Bus Bridge - costing hundreds of millions of dollars- potentially to be uploaded to the Queensland Government, despite bus congestion at Cultural Centre being due to high volumes of excess air carried by the BCC bus network because BCC insists on clinging to a high waste network design."

"This parlous state of affairs was entirely predictable and avoidable. Which is why TransLink were commissioned to do the bus review in the first place!"

"The City of Brisbane Act 2010 should be altered to strip BCC of all public transport functions. The Lord Mayor and BCC can no longer be trusted to run Brisbane's buses or ferries. After a decade of games, it's time to dump Brisbane City Council and separate Brisbane Transport."

Contact:

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

References:

1. SEQ: Bus Bridge Cost to be Uploaded to State Government? http://railbotforum.org/mbs/index.php?topic=10154.0

2. Brisbane CityCat and ferry services cut back in council $2m savings drive http://www.couriermail.com.au/news/queensland/brisbane-citycat-and-ferry-services-cut-back-in-council-2m-savings-drive/story-fnihsrf2-1226700378484

3. Lord Mayor and BCC can no longer be trusted to run city's buses http://railbotforum.org/mbs/index.php?topic=9895.0

[ozbob]

Discussion --> http://railbotforum.org/mbs/index.php?topic=9045.msg130359#msg130359

[Andrew]

"Brisbane's Public Transport network is falling further into the 'death spiral' of spin, inaction and chaos. There has been an enormous cost explosion at Brisbane Transport. This is placing huge pressure on TransLink to increase fares and further exacerbates the affordability death spiral."

So I'm guessing the fact Translink aren't supplying BT with any more funding than what they are now is just an inconvenient fact?

"The failure to follow through with the TransLink bus review has has led to a freeze in bus driver hiring and services cut across the network (and therefore less driver hours). Had BCC co-operated with the TransLink review rather than refuse on at least six occasions, Brisbane would have got an upgrade to 26 BUZ services, high frequency buses to Yeronga, Inala, The Northwest, Centenary Suburbs and Morningside. None of BCC's bus depots would have had to close, fares could have come down and fare revenue and passengers would have gone up!"

You are assuming of course here that Brisbane Transport would have wholeheartedly supported such a fantastic review that, among other things:

• gutted entire suburbs such as Highgate Hill of their bus services forcing elderly people to walk almost 500m to catch a bus over hilly terrain
• removal of service past Greenslopes Hospital
• left areas with no daytime or weekend services requiring a walk of up to 800m
• setting up busy corridors such as Bracken Ridge/Chermside, South East Busway, Carindale with little or no growth capacity even though there would arguably more people using these busy corridors due to the feeder service nature of the plans
• feeding a frequent 15 min service from Albany Creek into a 30 min Ferny Grove line train service on weekends
• No direct link between Acacia Ridge and Moorooka or one change link to the Ipswich Rd corridor.  Proposed changes would have resulted people changing at train stations which are not DDA compliant

Shall I continue?

Your statement also ignores the fact that BCC as a whole is looking at cost reductions as a whole and that some of these changes and closures that have occurred may have happened anyway.

"Instead, $2 million dollars will now be ripped out of the CityCat network in BCC's CityCat Cuts and none of these said suburbs are getting upgraded high frequency services."

Many of the suburbs serviced by the City Cats already have high frequency services and/or cross river links across the river to high frequency services.  These include Blue Glider (60), 199BUZ, 196BUZ, 412BUZ, 444BUZ

"There is duplication and waste within the BCC's bus network itself. One example is the Maroon CityGlider to Stones Corner. Another is the Adelaide Street Bus Bridge - costing hundreds of millions of dollars- potentially to be uploaded to the Queensland Government, despite bus congestion at Cultural Centre being due to high volumes of excess air carried by the BCC bus network because BCC insists on clinging to a high waste network design."

You guys are never satisfied are you? The Adelaide St bridge will allow sufficient capacity for future expansion for decades to come.  BCC make cuts but that isn't good enough.  The Maroon Glider will provide capacity if further routes are truncated or routed into Woolloongabba as well as providing a real, frequent alternative to Woolloongabba passengers once the 66 and 109 merge.

Why don't we reduce train frequency over the Merivale Bridge slightly because the trains aren't quite full and terminate all Cleveland trains at Park Road and make people change? No? Not a good idea? What a shame! That's the type of thing you're suggesting for the buses.  You are fixated on a short term fix by reducing services through Cultural Centre and then are AGAINST a long term growth strategy of a piece of infrastructure.  Am I the only one going WTF??

How about you guys come clean? What is your agenda? Who's wheelbarrow are you pushing?  Translink basically force BT to find cuts, which they do, and you still accuse BT of pushing up fares?  If Translink have a funding freeze (in essence) on BT, how are they possibly pushing up fares? You guys are really not doing yourself any favours credibility-wise here.  There is a federal election on.  Surely securing funding for Cross-River Rail is a much more urgent and appropriate target at the current time than playing with (ie. sticking pins in) your BT/BCC voodoo doll. 

"This parlous state of affairs was entirely predictable and avoidable. Which is why TransLink were commissioned to do the bus review in the first place!"

"The City of Brisbane Act 2010 should be altered to strip BCC of all public transport functions. The Lord Mayor and BCC can no longer be trusted to run Brisbane's buses or ferries. After a decade of games, it's time to dump Brisbane City Council and separate Brisbane Transport."

Don't know whether the BCC ratepayers will agree with you on that one.  How about we run the scenario that transport powers are stripped by altering the City of Brisbane Act 2010.  BCC could quite easily turn around and withdraw its additional funding (perhaps save for the citygliders).  This would put the state government in a very difficult financial position.

Firstly, the BT employees would have a little gem of the "transmission of business" clause in the EBA/Award agreements.  This would mean that our superior conditions (compared to private operators) would be required to be taken on by whoever purchases BT.  This operator too would then be forced to take on the full cost of these if Translink refuses to provide additional funding.  To put it simply, BCC funding mitigates Translink against the full cost of BT and allows it to remain competitive.  So pulling BT forcibly out of BCC will end in a higher cost to the state government UNLESS there is some serious austerity measures.  In the current state political climate, this would be electoral suicide.  A private operator too would not be there to provide a service on a basic level, it would be there to make a profit, which means there is a good likelihood that reliability and service quality will suffer.

Rail Back on Track should get it's priorities straight and level with people because it is certainly not the advocate for commuters it claims itself to be.

[HappyTrainGuy]

  The northside bus network is still f**ked. And so what if the bus is feeding into a 30 minute train line on the weekends. So no one wants to go to the shops at Albany Creek, the IGA at Eatons Hill, the Eatons Hill Tavern for a few drinks/lunch/dinner/entertainment or to Westfield at Chermside/Strathpine? Its that mentality that everyone must have a bus from their front door to the city! BT can't even get a decent bus service running to feed into a railway line with a 7 minute peak hour frequency. Heck, BT can't even run routes that they are supposed to be running. Albany Creek to Eatons Hill is a clusterfu%k trying to figure out if someone should catch the 338, 357 or the 359. Especially when the 359 that normally terminates at Eatons Hill suddenly terminates at Albany Creek with the 357 now doing that leg leap frogs the 359 meaning you have to wait for the next 357. For example if you get the 2.30-2.35 359 from the city there is the chance you'll get to Eatons Hill/Eatonvale around 4.10-4.20

[techblitz]

The hornets nest has just been stirred!
This will be the most popular thread tomorrow
Good on you for speaking your mind Andrew but judging by the plethora of anti-bt/bcc responses to come...your vastly outnumbered ....

[HappyTrainGuy]

I really honestly don't care what BT/BCC does so long as they can provide a proper bus network. They have the ability to do so but they keep shooting themselves in the foot. I can't comment about other parts of the network but the northside network is really a huge waste of money that could be better spent by deleting every route/service and redesigning a proper feeder into railway lines and interchanges and frequent corridors from scratch. Something which should have happened years ago.

[techblitz]

I really honestly don't care what BT/BCC does so long as they can provide a proper bus network. I can't comment about other parts of the network but the northside network is really a huge waste of money that could be better spent by deleting every route/service and redesigning a proper feeder into railway lines and interchanges and frequent corridors from scratch. Something which should have happened years ago.

I see it from both sides yet a lot of posters here of late are clearly one sided. Translinks review had major flaws and Brisbane transports current network also has major flaws. Yet the 26 buz route argument seems to supercede any errors made by translink in their review.
15 minute frequency grows patronage but implementing them for cross town routes really needs to be taken with caution. Especially with competing secondary routes during peak which would have swallowed up patronage numbers heading to the city.

[HappyTrainGuy]

I don't think anyone has said it was perfect. There certainly was flaws which I have pointed out here and via their feedback form before it was sh%t canned. Not being that familiar with the eastern/southern/western routes most of my feedback was for the northern, northwestern and northeastern Brisbane routes. Nudgee was one area that i wasn't happy with considering the housing expansion going on out there currently. But the review was still in its proposal stage. They were still seeking input and feedback for a network that BT didn't help out with in regards to designing. The northern network was also set up in such a way that once future infrastructure was built routes could be extended and modified accordingly. Many of the routes were simplified and fed into frequent corridors where as they would once slowly weave their way through the back streets with slow running times before running to the city. Its apparently one of the reasons why the majority of the northern network mods weren't supposed to be running till the very last chance where major infrastructure mods were in place/housing estates up and running.

[ozbob]

Thanks for your comments Andrew.  Good to be noticed. Sliding patronage, worsening affordability are occurring for a reason, that's my agenda to sort.  BCC can no longer implement a network that is a proper part of the overall network.  The runs are on the board.  Facts speak for themselves

The majority here disagree with your point of view.  So be it.   

Adelaide St bus bridge will be needed, and have said so, but better network management would reduce the bus congestion now, and give some time.

Time you accepted that there are problems, and it is time they were sorted.

By the way, I have been relentless in highlighting Cross River Rail.  Still a little optimistic, particularly with the Coalition launch here in Brisbane.

[ozbob]

Exactly HTG.  Had BT been allowed to properly cooperate a much better outcome would have been achieved.

All we have now is a worsening network.  With politics the priority.

[ozbob]

I see it from both sides yet a lot of posters here of late are clearly one sided. Translinks review had major flaws and Brisbane transports current network also has major flaws ...

Exactly, and the fact that BCC was allowed to sabotage the review process is why we hold them to account.

It is called justice ... 

[Jonno]

Thank you Andrew for defending a system that is carrying only 9% of trips and collapsing.  Meanwhile cities around the world are setting targets of 60% by active and public transport and reaping the economic, financial, health, safety and social benefits.

Brisbane is now so out of touch with the rest of the world that we are becoming used as an example of How Not To Build a Transport System!!!

[ozbob]

I am very proud of the fact that we do challenge the charade that is BCC.  I personally don't have grief with BT, it is the politicisation that is the problem.

1. Bus review called by Emerson.  Minnikin appointed review director.

2. BT under riding instructions from BCC political masters refuse to take part.

3. TransLink roll out review (with flaws, partly because of BCC intransigence). TransLink, Minnikin gagged.

4. BCC then drive a beat up.  Emerson rolls over to LNP rank.

5. Rest is history.

A comment I made 22 March 2013

http://www.abc.net.au/local/stories/2013/03/22/3721696.htm

Spokesman for community transport group Rail Back on Track, Robert Dow, said it was "very disappointing" that what he considered a flawed but largely positive Translink plan for Brisbane public transport looked like going to waste - and that he does not trust the council to do any better.

"Brisbane City Council, through Brisbane Transport, has created one of the world's most inefficient bus systems," Mr Dow said.

"[The Translink changes] would have been a tremendous benefit to Brisbane and south-east Qld broadly... Brisbane Transport just tends to think bus-only; they forget that there is a need to integrate bus with all the transport modes, and make it a proper functioning public transport system."

But Mr Dow also criticised the State Government and Translink for failing to properly communicate their plans to bus users, leaving many bus users fearful of the changes - even in areas that could have benefited.

"Part of the problem was that the documentation, all 101 pages, was quite complex. There was no attempt really to provide overall network coverage maps prior to the changes and after the changes, so people could actually comprehend what it meant that their bus route was going, but in many cases it was replaced by an alternative route and in some case many routes ....

[#Metro]

From the beginning:

So I'm guessing the fact Translink aren't supplying BT with any more funding than what they are now is just an inconvenient fact?

I have no sympathy for BCC or BT. The minister for transport clearly spelled out that if BCC did not want to participate in the TransLink review and instead run their own review then that was fine so long as they made savings and paid for it. BCC accepted. It was a voluntary agreement and if they do not like it they should not have made it. Ever increasing amounts of funds are being ripped out of TransLink and they are being used as an ATM. Why does BT need more funding, passenger trips have barely grown since 2009.

Where does the money come from for ever increasing quantities of funds to prop up a network that resists reform?  It comes from higher fares and higher taxes, fees fines and charges.

IF BCC wants more funds than it is entitled to, then it could quite simply increase residential rates from the excessive $400 it charges all ratepayers in the city. They are quite free to do this.

Many of the suburbs serviced by the City Cats already have high frequency services and/or cross river links across the river to high frequency services.  These include Blue Glider (60), 199BUZ, 196BUZ, 412BUZ, 444BUZ

I know of no buses that drive into the Brisbane river to emerge out of the water on the other side. If these buses were so great the CityCats would not be provided. The fact that CityCats are provided suggests that immediate cross river travel is a function that buses cannot perform. And inspection reveals this - no buses going from West End to St Lucia, no buses going from Toowong to West End Ferry Terminal, No buses going from South Bank to New Farm, No buses going from New Farm to Bulimba, no buses going from Hamilton to Bulimba etc.

You are assuming of course here that Brisbane Transport would have wholeheartedly
supported such a fantastic review that, among other things: gutted entire suburbs such as
Highgate Hill of their bus services forcing elderly people to walk almost 500m to catch a
bus over hilly terrain removal of service past Greenslopes Hospital left areas with no
daytime or weekend services requiring a walk of up to 800m setting up busy corridors such
as Bracken Ridge/Chermside, South East Busway, Carindale with little or no growth capacity
even though there would arguably more people using these busy corridors due to the feeder
service nature of the plans feeding a frequent 15 min service from Albany Creek into a 30
min Ferny Grove line train service on weekends No direct link between Acacia Ridge and
Moorooka or one change link to the Ipswich Rd corridor.  Proposed changes would have
resulted people changing at train stations which are not DDA compliant

We are assuming that if BCC actually participated then their feedback would have been incorporated negating flaws in the review. The reason why the flaws ever saw the light of day was that BCC refused to co-operate.

What is so fantastic about NO high frequency services to Yeronga, Bulimba/Morningside, Centenary Suburbs, The Northwest?
Highgate hill is hardly "gutted", we campaigned for an upgrade to the BUZ 196 and got it. Flexible options would go to people's door so they wouldn't have to walk anywhere. Why assume that there are no solutions to these problems?

There is plenty of growth capacity on the SEB and Carindale when 50% of buses in peak hour through Cultural Centre carry air. No the great forces against growth are (a) high fares, (b) low frequency due to too many routes not being reformed by consolidation and (c) illegibility.

Greenslopes hospital already has a private shuttle, and there is no reason why a bus travelling on a simpler route could simply connect the Busway at Greenslopes to the hospital and Logan Road and the shopping centre there.

BCC could have contributed to the review but they chose not to taking a "holier than art thou" approach and refusing on at least SIX occasions to meet with TransLink. Good for them!!

[#Metro]

How about you guys come clean? What is your agenda? Who's wheelbarrow are you pushing?
Translink basically force BT to find cuts, which they do, and you still accuse BT of
pushing up fares?

As the website explanation clearly states, no political parties, no PT operators, no experts, membership is free and open to all with
an interest in PT. BCC does not have to make cuts, it could simply increase rates if it wanted more funding.

Don't know whether the BCC ratepayers will agree with you on that one.  How about we run
the scenario that transport powers are stripped by altering the City of Brisbane Act 2010.
BCC could quite easily turn around and withdraw its additional funding (perhaps save for
the citygliders).  This would put the state government in a very difficult financial
position.

Not at all. Simply insert into the City of Brisbane Act a clause forcing BCC to collect the levy, freezing the levy at the current rate and indexing that to CPI. Problem solved.

Firstly, the BT employees would have a little gem of the "transmission of business" clause
in the EBA/Award agreements.  This would mean that our superior conditions (compared to
private operators) would be required to be taken on by whoever purchases BT.

If BT loses the contract or is uncompetitive then the entire operation will go bankrupt forcing them to sell their assets to someone else who could start a new company. This clause actually has the exact opposite effect - making it more difficult for any company to want to take over BT and making it more likely to be undercut by private competitors.

A private operator too would not be there to provide a service on a basic level,
it would be there to make a profit, which means there is a good likelihood that
reliability and service quality will suffer.

A private operator making a profit would mean that if it didn't do well it would be axed. BT can't be axed no matter how bad it plans the network. The CityCat is privatised, route 555 Logan City is privatised, who died? What is so great about reliability through Cultural Centre bottleneck caused by poor network planning? What is so good about service quality to Bulimba? To Yeronga? To the Northwest? To the Centenary Suburbs? Tell me.

[ozbob]

http://www.change.org/en-AU/petitions/lord-mayor-of-brisbane-graham-quirk-stop-the-cuts-to-citycat-and-cityferry-services-from-21-october-2013

[ozbob]

From the Couriermail Quest City South News 29 Aug 2013 page 5

Off-peak CityCat services face axe COUNCIL SEEKS BUDGET CUTS

Off-peak CityCat services face axe
COUNCIL SEEKS BUDGET CUTS
Jacinda Tutty

BRISBANE City Council has plans to cut off-peak CityCat services in a bid to claw back public transport savings.

Lord Mayor Graham Quirk announced the plan last week to "simplify" ferry timetables, saving more than $2 million from the council budget.

"The frequency of off-peak trips will change to every 15 minutes in daytime and every 30 minutes in the evening," Cr Quirk said.

"Peak-hour services will stay the same at every seven to 15 minutes.

"I have been endeavouring to find where there might be some efficiencies and savings because it is important that we deliver a cost-effective outcome for public transport services."

"This is about effectively planning for the growth of our network."

Rail Back on Track spokesman Robert Dow said the move was another step towards a "public transport death spiral" and would cause commuters to turn away from ferry services.

"First a bungled bus review, now this," he said.

"Reducing services is not the way to encourage people back on to public transport.

"It's unfair that CityCat commuters miss out because BCC is looking at ways at recovering costs to support its inefficient bus network."

Mr Dow said CityCat commuters were already frustrated with lengthy delays because of work along the river.

"Ferries have been running up to five to 15 minutes behind schedule because of a go-slow limit along the river while work is being completed," he said.

"This parlous state of affairs was entirely predictable and avoidable, its time for a proper review of the network rather than making cuts to save a few quick bucks." The timetable changes will come into effect on Monday, October 21.