Do you think there should be dedicated Minister for Public and Active Transport?

[ozbob]

NSW, South Australia,  and Victoria for example have a Minister for Public Transport.  Having a dedicated Minister gives a champion for public and active transport, not conflicted by other transport issues.  Is it time Queensland moved in this direction?

[#Metro]

http://www.cabinet.qld.gov.au/ministers.html

Don't we have this setup already? Craig Wallace MP on Roads and Annastacia on PT...?

[ozbob]

http://www.cabinet.qld.gov.au/ministers.html

Don't we have this setup already? Craig Wallace MP on Roads and Annastacia on PT...?

No, the present Minister for Transport has a lot do with road transport eg. car licencing, registration, trucks and so forth.  Craig Wallace is handling road infrastructure and busways ..

[somebody]

Hmm, I remember Ms Palas... being interviewed on 612 and couldn't take questions regarding road tolls.

Other jurisdictions do have Transport including PT & roads as one agency/Minister responsible.

[Stillwater]

If the LNP gets in by a landslide, there will be a large number of hopefuls looking for a ministerial portfolio.  Premier Newman would also need to have regard for the internal vying among Nats and Libs.  That would seem to suggest fewer super departments and more 'single issue' ministers.  For example, we now have one minister for police and emergency services (SES, police, ambulance), as well as prisons.  Prisons could be hived off to a single minister and there could be a minister for police and emergency services.  Not out of the ordinary to have a minister for public and active transport, but that person would need to have close liaison with the minister for main roads, for instance, who would be in charge of building roads with bus lanes and bicycle paths.  Also possible to have Level 1 Minister (Transport and Main Roads) assisted by junior ministers or Parliamentary Secretaries for parts of that portfolio (road safety, etc).  Would Translink stand as a separate unit, or would it brought back within the departmental structure?

[Golliwog]

I actually think it should be the other way. It should just be the Transport Minister, which would cover, PT, Roads, busways, licences, basically everything currently split between the Roads Minister and the Transport Minister. One department, one minister.

[HappyTrainGuy]

Anything to do with adding more random people for paid positions to agree to studies gets my vote. 

[SurfRail]

We should have a Department for Planning and Infrastructure, which should cover all transport, planning and related issues.  It does not make sense to me that these people are all in different buildings!

Massively cut down the size of the Main Roads component so it no longer competes with the "T" in "TMR", then bring over the planning people and related offices.

[Jonno]

I actually think it should be the other way. It should just be the Transport Minister, which would cover, PT, Roads, busways, licences, basically everything currently split between the Roads Minister and the Transport Minister. One department, one minister.

+1 .  A good transport Minister who is across the leading practices in the industry would be prioritizing freight rail and public/active transport and not having to argue against Main Roads!!!

But I am a dreamer remember!!!

[Golliwog]

We should have a Department for Planning and Infrastructure, which should cover all transport, planning and related issues.  It does not make sense to me that these people are all in different buildings!

Massively cut down the size of the Main Roads component so it no longer competes with the "T" in "TMR", then bring over the planning people and related offices.

Actually I like this idea as well. Though that would be a 'super' department, and I doubt Bligh would make any more changes given what she is planning with Health if she comes back, and Newman has said he doesn't like the 'super' departments and is going to at least split up DEEDI (or whatever it's called now)

[SurfRail]

We should have a Department for Planning and Infrastructure, which should cover all transport, planning and related issues.  It does not make sense to me that these people are all in different buildings!

Massively cut down the size of the Main Roads component so it no longer competes with the "T" in "TMR", then bring over the planning people and related offices.

Actually I like this idea as well. Though that would be a 'super' department, and I doubt Bligh would make any more changes given what she is planning with Health if she comes back, and Newman has said he doesn't like the 'super' departments and is going to at least split up DEEDI (or whatever it's called now)

I take the point, but frankly most of the problems we see are resulting from land use and transport not being integrated properly.  By actually having one minister responsible for that entire process (instead of the Bligh system which would give that department about 3 or 4 ministers), instead of being responsible for transport in a vacuum, we might start getting somewhere.

[ozbob]

Twitter

Daniel Bowen ‏ @danielbowen

@Robert_Dow Note Vic PT minister is also Roads.

[Fares_Fair]

For SEQ and longdistance rail/bus and air yes seperate. Minister for PT

The Minister for transport should look after Roads and Freight rail.

Question, why separate freight rail from general rail?

[Stillwater]

Minister for Rail Freight Logistics, Passenger and Active Transport