17 Mar 2012: SEQ: Mixed signals on Cross River Rail project ...

[ozbob]

Media release 17 March 2012

SEQ: Mixed signals on Cross River Rail project – time for LNP to reveal its planning

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, says it's time for the LNP to reveal its transport strategic plan, including its solution for overcoming Brisbane's looming cross-river rail congestion crisis.

Robert Dow, spokesperson for RAIL Back On Track, said:

"A week out from an election that pollsters predict will result in a change of government to the Liberal National Party (LNP), the people of South-East Queensland are none the wiser about a critical element affecting the liveability of their region and the urban structure of the city once governed by LNP leader, Campbell Newman, as Lord Mayor.

"The ALP supports the $6.3 billion Cross River Rail (CRR) project involving a rail tunnel beneath the Brisbane River and new city railway stations designed to almost double rail capacity on the crucial section between Roma Street and Bowen Hills.  We are told this track will be at capacity in four years time when no more new train services will be able to use the Merivale Street Bridge.  After five years planning, including the examination and rejection of all viable alternatives, the CRR project is 'construction ready'.

Mr Newman initially backed the CRR project in July 2010.  Since then, the political imperative has taken over.  Forced not to be seen supporting what they now regard as a 'Labor' initiative and in order to distinguish themselves politically, the LNP and Mr Newman  refer to  ill-defined alternatives.

"The trouble is we just don't know what their plans are.  Increasingly, it seems Mr Newman doesn't know either.  The delays in outlining fully the LNP transport planning for Brisbane and SEQ, unfortunately, portrays its leader as being indecisive and lacking a leadership vision in the eyes of voters.  This is something entirely of Mr Newman's making.

"He assures the public there is a plan, referring to its existence constantly throughout the campaign, but it is long overdue for release.  The tactical, political manoeuvring that requires the LNP transport policy to be revealed as a surprise in the dying days of the campaign is, unfortunately, back-firing.

"So what has Mr Newman said about CRR?   He would build it 'better and cheaper' but would appear not to know how, or won't reveal how.  A decision would be delayed by installing additional platform capacity at South Brisbane and South Bank stations, augmented by improved signalling.  That would buy two years until the capacity crisis re-emerges and does nothing to improve network redundancy either.  CRR also provides an alternate CBD rail axis, the need for which has been well highlighted during the past two major CBD network disruptions.

Public statements to date indicate that the LNP doesn't know what to do and, consequently, it proposes to establish an expert committee after the state election to provide advice on the best 'value for money' options to deal with passenger needs.  Is this not the process followed so far, leading to the emergence of the CRR proposal?

Mr Newman is sending conflicting signals by saying his 'expert panel' would examine the existing cross-river rail proposal, as well as 'alternatives'.

"Mr Newman's 'Can Do' approach has become 'Can't Do' on the crucial issue of better cross-river rail capacity.  It's time the LNP took voters into its confidence on CRR and transport planning more generally.  Otherwise, Mr Newman risks becoming the 'emperor with no clothes' – seemingly draping himself in a grand transport policy cloak that simply isn't there."

"While the LNP should be commended for partly addressing the public transport fares side of the equation, it is yet to show the sense of its public transport infrastructure planning.  We have the yin, but not the yang."

Contact:

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

[ozbob]

Discussion thread on Cross River Rail --> http://railbotforum.org/mbs/index.php?topic=2034.msg90951#msg90951

[ozbob]

From the Couriermail 17th March 2012 page 12

Big-ticket vows stuck at station



Article online --> here!

[ozbob]

The Tourism and Transport Forum (TTF), the RACQ, the SEQ Mayors, everyone it seems understands what Cross River Rail is really about and its significance, everyone except the LNP!

[Stillwater]

Took the words right out of my mouth, lol.

[Stillwater]

Mr Emerson is quoted as saying there is more to come from the LNP about transport matters.  The ALP is saying much the same.  The problem with leaving a major policy to the last week of a long election campaign is that, whatever the day chosen for release, your party's announcement can be trumped by your opponents releasing another, unrelated policy that has a bigger wow factor.  And you can do nothing about it.  There just isn't the time.  Or you can mull over the release date too much, holding it back, and then finding, all of a sudden, that it is Friday ... and that is the only day left to release.  Alternatively, you set the date and the news cycle beats you.  An Australian living treasure dies, or a dictator is overthrown somewhere, or a volcano erupts, or a bus full of school children crashes.....   That's what gets the media's attention, not your party announcement.

It's risky leaving a major policy 'til the last 'cos your options and opportunities to control the process begin to slip from your grasp. Unfortunately, it also shows a party as being shifty - unafraid to release early in case the lobby groups pull the policy apart in the remaining days of the campaign.  And, if it includes a big sum of money, best to leave it to that last day and announce that the policy was not made in time to be included in the party's financial costings.  If it is included in the costings, release on the last day, before the costings can be examined by a suburban accountant and found wanting.

It may not be the intent, but last minute policy announcements hint at them being 'non-core' and something that has to be promised begrudgingly to win over that remaining few bloc of voters who won't tell the pollsters their voting intention.  Your party has to keep throwing $50 notes out of the back of the election armoured car you hope to hijack, an overpass here and a new bus route there, in the hope that the buggers will slow down to collect the fiscal crumbs, not continue to chase after you for the major prize -- their democracy.

[#Metro]

Maybe it is time we had an online 'war room' meeting regarding Cross River Rail for members only?

[somebody]

Apparently most voters don't pay attention until the last few days of the campaign so it may well be risky releasing policies early.  Look at what happened to John Hewson.

[Stillwater]

John Hewson's undoing was that he could not explain to Mike Willisee how the then proposed GST would apply to a birthday cake bought at the baker's.

[Fares_Fair]

John Hewson's undoing was that he could not explain to Mike Willisee how the then proposed GST would apply to a birthday cake bought at the baker's.

Ah yes, I remember it well. The icing on the cake as it were. 

[somebody]

John Hewson's undoing was that he could not explain to Mike Willisee how the then proposed GST would apply to a birthday cake bought at the baker's.

I think that's a bit of a simplification.

[Stillwater]

Simon, see: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Birthday_cake_interview

[somebody]

Simon, see: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Birthday_cake_interview

the interview which contributed to Hewson's failure

I think that says it all.

[ozbob]

Twitter

Robert Dow ‏ @Robert_Dow

Is the LNP afraid of policy scrutiny? Must be --> http://railbotforum.org/mbs/index.php?topic=7895.0 #qldvotes #qldpol

[Stillwater]

Is the CRR project dead? From a political perspective, why should the LNP promise even a CRR Lite, when it looks like winning all but 15 or 16 seats in the parliament next Saturday?  There is no reason to toss another couple of billion at winning an election that the polls indicate you already have in the bag.  To do so would open the LNP to an attack about where the money will come from.  All you need to do is reassure the travelling public their system won't approach gridlock (some platform augmentation here and there) and you will see them right with 'something better and cheaper' to fix the problem when you turn an engineering eye to the issue, but after the election.

For the ALP federally, the issue is whether a $4 billion injection into CRR will swing the votes back to Labor.  It won't.  What would voters make of Julia Gillard and Anna Bligh standing shoulder to shoulder to make the CRR funding announcement.  Would they be seen as a couple of desperados who had just robbed the people's bank (Treasury) and were trying to buy votes?  Is it best to save the $4 billion and the CRR promise to a federal election in 18 months time when you might need to shore up a few seats federally?  The state seats are lost and can't be retrieved.

The question for both sides of state politics - Will a $6.3 billion project change the public's voting intentions?  The indications are that the answer is 'no'.

[Golliwog]

Unless the LNP come out and support CRR (I am very dubious about their talk of a cheaper solution) Brisbanes transport network is pretty much stuffed. Without CRR, the trains are pretty much stuffed. Campbell Newman and BCC were totally against removing a car lane to make a bus lane, so the only way to get a bus solution is to either have Newman change his position on this (it would involve listening to public servants who know what they're talking about, but so far the LNP attitude on public servants is they are there to do what the politicians tell them...) or to spend money widening the major arterials to add an extra lane for the buses. And even then the bus solution would be half arsed as it'd still only be class B and would require yet more buses to be bought and built.

In terms of Federal funding, if the Feds were to do something down the track, all I can see is some form of cat fight between the State and the Feds over how the project is built.

[Stillwater]

You raise a valid point, Golli.  The catfight is more sustained and ugly when you have parties of  a different colour at a federal and state level.  All the feds need to say now is that Mr Newman apparently as something else in mind to the existing CRR proposal and then put a statesmanlike hat on (not) while holding a poker face as you say: 'it would be inappropiate to allocate money for CRR until we see Mr Newman's proposal.'

Instant saving of $4 billion, which would be very badly needed to meet your federal objective of achieving a budget surplus in 2012-13.

[somebody]

the LNP attitude on public servants is they are there to do what the politicians tell them...

That pretty much is the correct world view.  Otherwise you have them being a law unto themselves, which is the situation which currently exists for the judiciary in most of the world.

[Golliwog]

the LNP attitude on public servants is they are there to do what the politicians tell them...

That pretty much is the correct world view.  Otherwise you have them being a law unto themselves, which is the situation which currently exists for the judiciary in most of the world.

To a point, yes. However when it comes to things like roads vs. rail and other arguments, the politician is more than likely going to say "build roads, because thats what people like/want" when in reality what is needed is a more balanced approach, which is what the public servants know. They just need to make the politician see that as long as people can get where they want to go in a timely fashion, they won't mind much if the solution is actually to get them out of their cars.

[somebody]

the LNP attitude on public servants is they are there to do what the politicians tell them...

That pretty much is the correct world view.  Otherwise you have them being a law unto themselves, which is the situation which currently exists for the judiciary in most of the world.

To a point, yes. However when it comes to things like roads vs. rail and other arguments, the politician is more than likely going to say "build roads, because thats what people like/want" when in reality what is needed is a more balanced approach, which is what the public servants know. They just need to make the politician see that as long as people can get where they want to go in a timely fashion, they won't mind much if the solution is actually to get them out of their cars.

What, so what the people want shouldn't be listened to?  Sounds like a dictatorship to me.

[ozbob]

Maybe it is time we had an online 'war room' meeting regarding Cross River Rail for members only?

If members are interested we can have a meeting in the chat room at 7pm this evening (18th March 2012).

Simply go here or click on chat tab -->  http://railbotforum.org/mbs/index.php?action=page;id=8

You need to be logged into the forum to be able to access chat.

If you are not familiar with the chat interface you can go there any time and get an idea how it works.

[Golliwog]

the LNP attitude on public servants is they are there to do what the politicians tell them...

That pretty much is the correct world view.  Otherwise you have them being a law unto themselves, which is the situation which currently exists for the judiciary in most of the world.

To a point, yes. However when it comes to things like roads vs. rail and other arguments, the politician is more than likely going to say "build roads, because thats what people like/want" when in reality what is needed is a more balanced approach, which is what the public servants know. They just need to make the politician see that as long as people can get where they want to go in a timely fashion, they won't mind much if the solution is actually to get them out of their cars.

What, so what the people want shouldn't be listened to?  Sounds like a dictatorship to me.

I never said ignore them. Just that most punters are simple minded when it comes to solutions to problems. Theres traffic on the road=widen the road/build another road. Buses are full=put more buses on. Public servants who have studied transport systems and work with them know these solutions are simplistic and won't solve the problem, but should we just do them because thats what the people want?

[somebody]

If the public is wrong then education is needed.

If unsuccessful, and they are paying for it, then yes.

[ozbob]

Sent to all outlets:

19th March 2012

Re: SEQ: Mixed signals on Cross River Rail project – time for LNP to reveal its planning

Greetings,

The transport policy vacuum is very concerning.  Is this a signpost for the future?

I see Mr Newman is keen to remove T2 lanes from Waterworks Road.  We saw the effects of removal of bus lanes on Coronation ' Stagnation' Drive -  more congestion and chaos.  History repeating?

In the new cabinet how about a Minister for Public and Active Transport?   Someone who can see past the car / truck centric madness and actually champion a more enlightened approach.

Question for you:  Will the LNP commit to connecting Legacy Way to the Inner Northern Busway, to at least give some credibility to Mr Newman's assertion that ' up to 2000 express buses will use Northern Link (now Legacy Way) daily?'

See --> http://railbotforum.org/mbs/index.php?topic=7886.msg90944#msg90944

Not looking to bright is it?  If the transport system collapses so does everything else ...  we have a crisis about to happen.

Enjoy the gridlock!

Best wishes
Robert

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

Media release 17 March 2012

SEQ: Mixed signals on Cross River Rail project – time for LNP to reveal its planning

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, says it's time for the LNP to reveal its transport strategic plan, including its solution for overcoming Brisbane's looming cross-river rail congestion crisis.

Robert Dow, spokesperson for RAIL Back On Track, said:

"A week out from an election that pollsters predict will result in a change of government to the Liberal National Party (LNP), the people of South-East Queensland are none the wiser about a critical element affecting the liveability of their region and the urban structure of the city once governed by LNP leader, Campbell Newman, as Lord Mayor.

"The ALP supports the $6.3 billion Cross River Rail (CRR) project involving a rail tunnel beneath the Brisbane River and new city railway stations designed to almost double rail capacity on the crucial section between Roma Street and Bowen Hills.  We are told this track will be at capacity in four years time when no more new train services will be able to use the Merivale Street Bridge.  After five years planning, including the examination and rejection of all viable alternatives, the CRR project is 'construction ready'.

Mr Newman initially backed the CRR project in July 2010.  Since then, the political imperative has taken over.  Forced not to be seen supporting what they now regard as a 'Labor' initiative and in order to distinguish themselves politically, the LNP and Mr Newman  refer to  ill-defined alternatives.

"The trouble is we just don't know what their plans are.  Increasingly, it seems Mr Newman doesn't know either.  The delays in outlining fully the LNP transport planning for Brisbane and SEQ, unfortunately, portrays its leader as being indecisive and lacking a leadership vision in the eyes of voters.  This is something entirely of Mr Newman's making.

"He assures the public there is a plan, referring to its existence constantly throughout the campaign, but it is long overdue for release.  The tactical, political manoeuvring that requires the LNP transport policy to be revealed as a surprise in the dying days of the campaign is, unfortunately, back-firing.

"So what has Mr Newman said about CRR?   He would build it 'better and cheaper' but would appear not to know how, or won't reveal how.  A decision would be delayed by installing additional platform capacity at South Brisbane and South Bank stations, augmented by improved signalling.  That would buy two years until the capacity crisis re-emerges and does nothing to improve network redundancy either.  CRR also provides an alternate CBD rail axis, the need for which has been well highlighted during the past two major CBD network disruptions.

Public statements to date indicate that the LNP doesn't know what to do and, consequently, it proposes to establish an expert committee after the state election to provide advice on the best 'value for money' options to deal with passenger needs.  Is this not the process followed so far, leading to the emergence of the CRR proposal?

Mr Newman is sending conflicting signals by saying his 'expert panel' would examine the existing cross-river rail proposal, as well as 'alternatives'.

"Mr Newman's 'Can Do' approach has become 'Can't Do' on the crucial issue of better cross-river rail capacity.  It's time the LNP took voters into its confidence on CRR and transport planning more generally.  Otherwise, Mr Newman risks becoming the 'emperor with no clothes' – seemingly draping himself in a grand transport policy cloak that simply isn't there."

"While the LNP should be commended for partly addressing the public transport fares side of the equation, it is yet to show the sense of its public transport infrastructure planning.  We have the yin, but not the yang."

Contact:

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

[ozbob]

From the Brisbane mX 12th March 2012 page 5

Transport gets silent treatment