Poll: ICA - Public Transport Outcomes

[ozbob]

Note: 3 day poll.  Assume BT is contestable as is rail and all other bus.

Public transport

--> http://www.treasury.qld.gov.au/coa-response/better-services.shtml#B3_Public_Transport

B3 Public Transport

15
   

City passenger rail services and network infrastructure be opened up to contestability, like bus services, to allow different providers, including private providers, to bid to operate services and maintain below-rail assets in a particular franchised area under franchise and lease arrangements.
   
Accepted

The Government accepts this recommendation for City Passenger services and rail infrastructure and notes that it is consistent with Government's current direction and will be considered as part of the ongoing reform activities in the Department of Transport and Main Roads.

16
   

Competitive tendering be introduced for long distance and tourist passenger rail service contracts, including :  evaluating the number of routes serviced and frequencies, franchisees and franchise areas before initiating the tender;  owning the rolling stock required to provide the services in a State Government entity, and lease this to the franchisee for the term of the contract.
   
Accepted

The Government accepts this recommendation and notes that the reform of long distance travel is currently under investigation in the Department of Transport and Main Roads. The Government remains committed to effective, efficient and affordable transport solutions for regional Queensland.
17    

Competitive tendering be introduced for bus service contracts throughout Queensland, including evaluating the number of routes serviced and frequencies, franchisees and franchise areas before initiating the tender.
   
Accepted

The Government accepts this recommendation and notes that the reform of bus service contracts has been the subject of major investigation in the Department of Transport and Main Roads. The Government remains committed to strong value-for-money outcomes for Queensland taxpayers and the development of efficient and affordable bus services.

18
   

Mount Isa rail freight line be transferred to Port of Townsville to be managed as an integrated supply chain, with a view to divestment of the integrated business
   
Accepted in part

The Government accepts the recommendation as it relates to the benefits of an integrated supply chain. However, while there may be operational benefits from an integrated supply chain, further work is required to determine whether the transfer is the best way to achieve these benefits. The Government does not currently have a policy to sell State assets and remains fully committed to seeking a mandate from the Queensland people before divesting itself of any government business.  However, the Government believes this proposal is worthy of an open and transparent community debate to establish its viability and to inform stakeholders of the costs and benefits of Government owning such businesses.

19
   

Queensland Rail remain the owner and operator of the regional rail network, but with the maintenance task to be outsourced through competitive tendering process.
   
Accepted

The Government accepts this recommendation and believes there is an important role for Queensland Rail as the regional rail network owner and operator into the future, but agrees that the maintenance task should be subject to contestability. The Government is mindful of the need to maintain employment levels in regional areas and, in this regard, acknowledges the importance of maintenance delivery from regional bases. It should also be noted that contestability is not an outcome – it is a process where Government tests the market to ensure it is providing the public with the best possible solution at the best possible price.

[nathandavid88]

At first glance yes, I do support it, but I'd like to see more information as to what it means for QR's citytrain services, and that BT will not remain the sacred cow.

[petey3801]

Problem is, BT is a council issue, not a state issue, so will likely be kept as is.

[#Metro]

Can't afford to keep BT as it is. Cost blow out is enormous! 

[ozbob]

At first glance yes, I do support it, but I'd like to see more information as to what it means for QR's citytrain services, and that BT will not remain the sacred cow.

As I understand operation etc. will be opened up to competitive tendering.  Does not exclude QR as such ...  they would tender as well I would hope and expect.  Same deal with BT I would imagine ..

[nathandavid88]

Problem is, BT is a council issue, not a state issue, so will likely be kept as is.

But the provision of bus transport is the state issue and, correct me if I'm wrong, but isn't a portion of BT's fleet technically state-owned (via QIC if I recall correctly)?

Could, say, Veolia, or Clarks LCBS come in and say that we could operate services around the fringe cheaper than BT can if you lease us some buses? Eat away at the edges of the BT fiefdom?

[ozbob]

Yes, BT might have to tender to run buses outside BCC to remain competitive and vice versa ...   

TransDev could run the CityGlider ...

Ventura could run the lot ...  BT could run the lot (unlikely) ... but get the idea?

MTR could run the trains, Queensland Rail could run the trains.

Competitive tendering means it is open to competition.  I expected that rail operations would be opened up and have personally internally accepted that months ago, delighted that bus will be as well.

[#Metro]

[ozbob]

The Premier during Question Times has just said Queensland Rail are still able to competitive tender.  As I expected, and I expect BT will be in the same boat ..  (pun not intended .. lol).

Wouldn't be kind of ironical if Queensland Rail won their tender and BT lost theirs to say Ventura?

[#Metro]

I reckon the BEST way forward is that the bus and the train contracts are tendered TOGETHER as a single package, same operator. That way there will be MAXIMUM impetus for an integrated bus-train network. Buses feeding trains, excellent co-ordination, like the TTC has. I propose that we VERY STRONGLY push for the CityTrain and Bus Contracts to be packaged together for the sake of proper integration. Also gives absolute maximum ground for co-operation with Translink.

[SurfRail]

I wouldn't get bogged down in shadowboxing what will happen with tendering, but it should be supported.

Perth has the best model, and we are increasingly being left behind even basket cases like Sydney.

[ozbob]

Yes, no real issues from me.  Poll is looking at the broad issues.

Current operators will all be able to tender. 

It is time to do something, both rail and bus particularly.   No point in bleating, be constructive and accept the inevitable.

At least operators will be able to speak out ...

[#Metro]

Brisbane Transport may have to merge with Queensland Rail to fend off the competition and save themselves! I would like to see that!!

[nathandavid88]

Brisbane Transport may have to merge with Queensland Rail to fend off the competition and save themselves! I would like to see that!!

And risk BCC getting a say in the running of QR??? Oh hell no!!!

[#Metro]

And risk BCC getting a say in the running of QR??? Oh hell no!!!

BCC would have to relinquish BT first. Or enter into a consortium or Joint Venture with QR.  Or a private train company.
And if they can't do it, then the private companies for trains and buses could form a consortium and do it that way.

There would suddenly be a very powerful incentive NOT to run a dis-integrated network or buses versus trains. It is all about aligning incentives. A bus + train single integrated contract does that. Public agencies such as the TTC do it overseas, so I can't see why the private sector can't come up with a similar innovation so long as the Government permits the packaging of both together as one contract.

[somebody]

Of course they should do it.  I started a thread last year saying so.  I would have thought it was an axiom, the only other reasonable model is full public ownership.

Perth has the best model, and we are increasingly being left behind even basket cases like Sydney.

Sydney is working towards a similar model to Perth regarding bus operations.

Problem is, BT is a council issue, not a state issue, so will likely be kept as is.

Well the functions administered by councils are a state issue, so I would have said that it is.  Perhaps a little less directly.

[SurfRail]

Sydney is working towards a similar model to Perth regarding bus operations.

It is indeed.  The Unsworth stuff is finally paying off. 

Even Melbourne is doing it now.  I suspect it won't be too long until ACTION and Metro Tas follow suit.

[ozbob]

The Premier during Question Times has just said Queensland Rail are still able to competitive tender.  As I expected, and I expect BT will be in the same boat ..  (pun not intended .. lol).

Wouldn't be kind of ironical if Queensland Rail won their tender and BT lost theirs to say Ventura?

Queensland Parliament Hansard

http://www.parliament.qld.gov.au/documents/hansard/2013/2013_04_30_DAILY.pdf

Queensland Rail, Passenger Services

Ms TRAD: My question without notice is to the Premier. Given the government's acceptance of Peter Costello's recommendation to break up QR passenger services into separate franchise areas, will the Premier guarantee that the outsourcing and privatisation of Queensland Rail's passenger services will not lead to increased fares, a reduction in rail services and massive job losses?

Mr NEWMAN: I can guarantee a couple of things. Firstly I can guarantee that the public transport fare increase of 15 per cent for the current year we are in will not be happening—the Labor 15 per cent increase will not be happening. I can confirm that the other fare increase of 15 per cent that the current Leader of the Opposition put in place will not be happening as well. They will be halved. I can confirm that. I remind those opposite that they are the people who sold off the very profitable and lucrative bit of QR and left the stuff that did not make money—

Mr Seeney: And sold it rather cheaply.

Mr NEWMAN: They sold it rather cheaply, as we can probably see right now. What was said by the then transport minister in this House? As we heard from Minister McArdle earlier on, in this place a direct question was asked of the then Minister for Transport about whether QR would be sold off. That Minister for Transport said that it would not be sold off; it was not going to happen. Two days later, it was on the chopping block. There are a couple of things I need to draw out about that. Firstly, the people of Queensland did not know; they had been told there would be no asset sales. Secondly, the then cabinet of Premier Anna Bligh and Treasurer Andrew Fraser were not even told. Clearly the caucus was not told and then just told to suck it up.

Let us contrast that with our way of doing business. We have a very clear position that we will not be selling off assets without going to the people of Queensland. We have had our cabinet involved in a full discussion that provided a set of recommendations to our party room. The party room, a fine group of men and women, spent seven hours yesterday debating the issue and coming up with this endorsed response. What a breathtaking contrast that is with those hypocrites opposite.

In terms of the issue about passenger services on the South-East Queensland rail network, we are about competitive, efficient services. On the contestability issue, our position is that if the hardworking men and women in QR can do it as inexpensively on the public purse as can private sector operators, and there are many benchmarks interstate, it shall be done by them. At the end of the day, it is about the people of Queensland; it is about the commuters and the fares they have to pay. We are trying to keep those fares down. Those opposite just wanted to hit commuters with a 15 per cent increase, year after year. That is the difference.
(Time expired)
Social