Infrastructure Funding for Queensland

[#Metro]

I think projects should be based on their merit and utility.

I'm not into the whole mode picking business. Having hi-frequency buses and trains run around the back of whoop whoop at enormous costs and low benefit isn't great if it means that other areas have to put up with black hole service.

There is a place for roads and cars, there is a place for buses, planes and trains etc.

Governments have wasted money and played all sorts of stupid games in the past, and I expect that they shall continue to do so well into the future.

[ozbob]

ABC Radio National

Public transport delivery works best when planning and funding decisions are removed from politics.

>> http://www.abc.net.au/radionational/programs/latenightlive/why-fund-rail-when-roads-are-our-future3f/6512102

[Jonno]

I think projects should be based on their merit and utility.

I'm not into the whole mode picking business. Having hi-frequency buses and trains run around the back of whoop whoop at enormous costs and low benefit isn't great if it means that other areas have to put up with black hole service.

There is a place for roads and cars, there is a place for buses, planes and trains etc.

Governments have wasted money and played all sorts of stupid games in the past, and I expect that they shall continue to do so well into the future.

Agree totally but they are not. They are being based on 1970's principles and flawed business cases!!

[ozbob]

Brisbanetimes --> Premier digs in against PM on federal funding

[red dragin]

Brisbanetimes --> Premier digs in against PM on federal funding

"We've flat out rejected something, but Tony shouldn't" is what I am reading? 

She'd better grab a shovel and starting to 'dig-in' to the NCL upgrade.

[ozbob]

Brisbanetimes --> Private investors need infrastructure funding certainty: conference

[colinw]

Sigh.  Debt is not a dirty word.

[Stillwater]

I heard the Premier in an interview say that she will be going to the meeting on state-fed funding with no ideas of her own, but one objective -- that Queensland is 'no worse off'.  How pro-active is that?  She wants Tony Abbot to tell her how Queensland infrastructure is to be funded, but has no idea herself, apart from SHOW ME THE MONEY!

[#Metro]

Well I'm sure the response will be entirely predictable.

AP: 'Show me the money!'
TA: 'Show us the asset sales.'

Totally unworkable. Three years will roll around and nothing will have been built. Quite convenient actually as there probably isn't the funds in the QLD budget anyway.

[ozbob]

Sent to all outlets:

11th July 2015

Greetings,

Cross River Rail, Light Rail and Sunshine Coast Line faster with Land Tax

STATE INFRASTRUCTURE projects could be accelerated if Treasurer Curtis Pitt reformed Queensland's land tax regime.

Recently, Federal Treasury Secretary John Fraser called for Land Tax reform and replacement of stamp duties.

Raising infrastructure funds through Land Tax will give the Queensland Government the power to decide what infrastructure to fund and when. Federal funding is always welcome, but it can and does hold up vital infrastructure. There is also less funding competition from mega-projects in Sydney and Melbourne when funding is self-sufficient.

Reform will take power away from Canberra and give it back to Queensland and Queenslanders.

Surrounding private properties often get a values boost when infrastructure is built. That boost is coming straight from taxpayers. We think some of that money should go back to the community rather than being privately pocketed.

The current land tax arrangements needs change. You can drive a truck through the massive loopholes, tax breaks and exemptions. There you have government ministers crying poor in Canberra, asking for more money on the one hand,  while in Queensland they're giving away absolutely enormous land tax breaks, concessions and exemptions.

It's like they want to have a bet both ways.

Economists agree that out of all taxes, Land Tax is one of the least worst. Rates are extremely low and it is easy to collect.  With the Queensland Government being more self sufficient, raising its own funds, infrastructure such as the Gold Coast Light Rail, Sunshine Coast Line upgrade and Cross River Rail would be built much faster.

Treasurer Curtis Pitt, you need to get on board!

Best wishes
Robert

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

References:

Treasury Secretary John Fraser - Brisbane Times http://www.brisbanetimes.com.au/federal-politics/political-news/treasury-secretary-john-fraser-reignites-call-for-industrial-relations-tax-reform-20150710-gi9p66.html

Land Tax often overlooked in land debate http://www.theage.com.au/comment/land-tax-often-overlooked-in-the-tax-debate-20150407-1mfro2.html

Scrap stamp duty? Yes, then tax the family home http://www.smh.com.au/business/the-economy/scrap-stamp-duty-yes-then-tax-the-family-home-20150615-gho0gt.html

[ozbob]

Letter to the Editor Queensland Times 13th July 2015 page 21

Land tax reform could speed up cross river rail

[ozbob]

http://statements.qld.gov.au/Statement/2015/7/13/queensland-opens-door-to-private-infrastructure-investors

Media Release
Treasurer, Minister for Employment and Industrial Relations and Minister for Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Partnerships
The Honourable Curtis Pitt

Queensland opens door to private infrastructure investors

The Palaszczuk Government will introduce a streamlined assessment process to encourage infrastructure investment and development in Tuesday's State Budget.

Treasurer Curtis Pitt said the time was right to encourage market led proposals to play a greater role in promoting growth and investment opportunities in Queensland.

"We want to send out a very clear message to developers and investors that Queensland is open for business," he said.

"Our government is focused on infrastructure delivery, which is why we want to harness the knowledge and expertise of the private sector.

"We want to engage more seamlessly with industry to secure new projects and attract more investment.

"That's why we're making it easier for the private sector to submit proposals which can capture economic uplift and job opportunities.

"We want Queensland to lead the nation in working with the private sector to implement innovative financial arrangements which can deliver infrastructure, new projects and more jobs."

Mr Pitt said a new online portal would go live this week, enabling proponents to put forward proposals for priority consideration.

"This portal will make it easier for industry proponents to submit a proposal, especially complex proposals with interest from multiple government departments," he said.

"We're going to require government agencies to consider private sector collaboration to bring projects online as a priority.

"An expert panel comprised of representatives from key government agencies will assess any market-led proposals."

Mr Pitt said the streamlined assessment process for market-led proposals aimed to attract unique proposals.

The guidelines now state that a proposal and/or proponent may be considered unique if, for example:

• The proponent owns or controls land, intellectual property or other legal rights that limit competitors from being able to deliver the same outcomes;
• There are no competitors or those currently in the market would be unable to deliver the same outcomes; or
• A combination of unique attributes are demonstrated by the proponent to create a unique proposal and constitute an innovative departure from previous practice.

"Queensland needs a whole-of-government project assessment process that establishes a common approach to assessing infrastructure projects at critical stages in their lifecycle," he said.

[SurfRail]

[hint]goldlinq[/hint]

[ozbob]

>> here!

[Stillwater]

"An expert panel comprised of representatives from key government agencies will assess any market-led proposals." 

Is this expert panel Infrastructure Queensland?  If not, how will a separate expert panel liaise and interact with Infrastructure Queensland?  How will the government stop developers and proponents playing off one group said to be an 'expert panel' and another expert panel, known as Infrastructure Queensland?  What happens if Infrastructure Queensland supports and proposal, and recommends that project to government for funding and the separate 'expert panel' disagrees?  Does it boil down to the electorate in which the investment is proposed?

[ozbob]

For interest ...

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

Twitter

David Marler ‏@Qldaah 10h

Significant era of Qld infrastructure projects. (Newman Govt 2012-13 to 2013-14. All else Beattie-Bligh). #qldpol

[ozbob]

Couriermail --> Tony Abbott must give Queensland its share of infrastructure funding, no strings attached

DEAR Prime Minister, on the eve of the coming Australian Leaders Retreat to discuss wideranging reform, Queensland is still shamefully denied $1 billion for new infrastructure projects.
Not only does Queensland need projects built, these new infrastructure projects would mean more jobs for Queensland. The fact that we are denied funding is iniquitous and must be righted.

It is critical we meet and resolve this situation, which has reached an impasse. That's why I am writing this open letter to you.

Queenslanders are currently locked out of your $5 billion asset recycling initiative.

With 72 cents of every tax dollar collected in Queensland going to Canberra, why should we go wanting?

On a population basis, Queenslanders are entitled to $1 billion of that funding.

However your government is imposing a precondition — that we must sell assets before we can apply.

This is a coercive approach, one which should never apply to federal/state funding arrangements.

Queenslanders won't be bullied and held to ransom for what is quite rightfully their fair share of their tax dollars.

It flies in the face of our innate sense of decency and fair play.

What it amounts to, Prime Minister, is an unfair heist Queenslanders won't forget or easily forgive.

Queenslanders elected my Government on a mandate not to sell our state-owned assets. This policy has also been endorsed by your colleagues in the Queensland LNP Opposition.

Your stubbornness in this matter and the fact it is supported by your Treasurer is very disappointing.

Statements from Deputy Prime Minister and Minister for Infrastructure, Warren Truss, that Queensland is now paying the price for not selling state assets is especially shocking coming from a Queenslander.

Mr Truss stated: "Queensland has got this mental block about it now (selling assets) and the state is going to be hurt."

The people of Queensland were also shocked to read that the $1.2 billion Northern Australia White Paper says that the Federal Government's investment will, in part, be achieved as a result of an expected underspend of $800 million in the Asset Recycling Initiative, primarily as a result of the Queensland Government's decision not to sell assets.

We are forced to share this funding with Western Australia and the Northern Territory despite more than two thirds of Northern Australia's population residing in Queensland. This was done without consultation.

At the last COAG Meeting, the Federal Government also agreed to a special one-off funding of $499 million in roads infrastructure for Western Australia.

As the Federal Government has agreed to this special arrangement to provide infrastructure funding to Western Australia, I reiterate my request for a similar payment for Queensland.

In your correspondence with me you state your decision to provide additional support to Western Australia was based on an "extraordinary" situation "following a perfect storm of rapidly falling iron royalties and an expected GST share in 2015/16 of less than 30 cents in the dollar (that had) significantly impacted their ability to fund critical infrastructure projects".

The Queensland Government also faced a similar $3 billion writedown in royalties.

While you insist you "are not in the business of funding urban public transport other than through asset recycling", your Assistant Minister for Infrastructure and Regional Development, Jamie Briggs MP appeared to have left the door ajar.

Mr Briggs has said your Government "would give consideration to funding the 2nd stage of the Gold Coast Light Rail project if a business case was prepared".

All three levels of government need to work together to fund projects like the Gold Coast Light Rail and Brisbane's Cross River Rail project.

Well a business case has long been prepared and the former project is shovel ready. I call on you now to grasp this opportunity and part fund the Light Rail project.

The necessary federal funding would be part of a specially designated one-off infrastructure grant for Gold Coast Light Rail Stage 2 to be constructed just in time for the Commonwealth Games.

My Government and Gold Coast City Mayor, Tom Tate are together with regard to funding for the Light Rail extension which would be an impressive legacy from the Commonwealth Games.

Mr Tate stated publicly the $220 million the Commonwealth would contribute was "a round of drinks".

"Come on Tony it is your shout," he said. And I concur.

I also remind you the business case has been prepared and is ready for another congestion busting project urgently required in Brisbane — a second river rail crossing.

This project was identified as the number one requirement for the nation in Infrastructure Australia's last priority list.

Queenslanders are growing ever more fearful they are being badly short changed by your government in funding for infrastructure.

Many, including business leaders, are openly worried we are being treated as second-class citizens within the federation over our unwillingness to sell our state assets.

This approach tears at the very fabric of our federation and Commonwealth-state funding relations.

Prime Minister, I hope we can finally have a constructive discussion for a funding deal for new infrastructure for Queensland.

Yours sincerely,

Annastacia Palaszczuk

Premier of Queensland.

[#Metro]

Nothing is getting built for the next 10 years. The fact that this letter was even published in a newspaper means that it has become a political football already.

Western Australia self-funded the entire doubling of the TransPerth rail network in 2007, with no federal money. The Queensland Government forgoes vast amounts (billions) in revenue each year by exempting owner occupied property and other properties from land tax, which is one of the most efficient, effective and least distortionary taxes known.

More money is forgone when value is not captured on large public projects such as new hospitals or new transport infrastructure.

If the Queensland Government did not sell assets, then it has retained those assets value which can be borrowed against. Borrowing costs are at absolute record lows.

And if I am correct, the Light Rail project will not serve the Commonwealth Games venue at all - with many events held at Carrara Stadium, which is not on the LRT network.

[Stillwater]

Although addressed to the Prime Minister, Ms Palasczcuk's real intended readers are the people of Queensland.  Why else make this a public letter?  The letter smacks of entitlement when none is due.  The real reward goes to those states that do their homework and have a credible plan, including business case studies for major projects.  Queensland won't have a state infrastructure plan for another 12 months.  While a business case exists for the old CRR project, it is a bit dated, an we have been told the cross river rail project Labor now has in mind is not the old CRR, but something similar.  So, where is the business case for the CRR equivalent?

In any event, it is clear that Gold Coast Light Rail is Queensland's No.1 transport infrastructure priority, even if it is not the most urgent.  It serves a number of seats Labor needs to keep happy and the white shoe brigade now loves light rail because of the dollar values that accrue to land they want to buy up along its path.  The developers are lobbying hard.   It is also the project you build when you don't have a spare $8 billion for CRR.  So, it shoots to the top of the queue.  We also seem to be falling into the same trap of devising a state infrastructure plan that is full of caveats. ("*This project is subject to federal government funding.")  So, the infrastructure plan becomes no more than a lobbying document.  It is built on a fundamentally flawed premise.

Ms Palasczcuk should also be wary of rhetoric about developing northern Australia.  The game she is trying to play could be played against her.  What would happen if the PM called a media conference tomorrow to announced the good news that his government will invest in Queensland Rail, calling on the state government to match dollar for dollar construction of a railway line west of Mt Isa to the NT border, and from there to Tennant Creek?  The Coalition will then be able to wedge Labor, which would not desire to stump up the money and wouldn't even have the dollars in the first place.

Most premiers are going to the special conference with a plan for this new tax or that new funding arrangement.  Ms Palasczcuk is going with a letter of two pages.  Her plan is to roll that letter into a hard cylinder,  which she intends to poke in Tony Abbot's back and say "stickem up, where's Queensland's money?"

Immediately she has dealt herself the role of irrelevancy while, in her own mind seeing herself as sticking up for Queensland.  As the political game is played out, Tony Abbot won't be concerned, because he can say he is the infrastructure PM, and is putting his money into Melbourne-Brisbane freight line.

Where the feds are vulnerable is their obligation to fund the nation's rail freight network.  The Ipswich and SCL are on the national freight network.  Ms Palaszczuk is not calling for the feds to fund what's their responsibility, but the very thing that's not -- Gold Coast Light Rail.  She is doomed to failure.  In fact, it would appear that she desires to fail in order to create the scenario whereby a knockback to Queensland would spar political anger against the Coalition in Queensland.  Once more, ugly politics is at play.

There is no concept of 'state shares' for buckets of money.  Lazy governments that don't do the groundwork don't deserve the money.  Just saying 'give me the money' is no longer good enough.  And it won't work.

Ms Palasczcuk should go to the special premier's conference with a tax reform plan for the nation; to discuss with other state leaders (congestion tax, land tax reform, beneficial tax around public transport projects) then the PM might be interested.  She adopts a "me-me" (Queensland) approach instead of an "us-us" (state-federal reform) approach.  That appeals to the maroon (moron?) masses but goes down so poorly in Canberra.

The Premier risks her respect and credibility.
 

[#Metro]

Where is the business case or even the engineering plan for Cross River Rail II? Will there be a station at Park Road or not? Nobody knows, because at the moment it is at THOUGHT BUBBLE stage!

What about GCLRT? Will it go via Harbour Town or Smith Street? No idea! No costings, not even sure what to build!

Thank goodness bus reform costs nearly nothing to do! Nothing else much has a hope of getting done!

[ozbob]

^ Transport planning think-tank in Queensland!

[Stillwater]

   bus reform, fare reform

If the state government was fair-dinkum, it would tackle these first.  Low-hanging fruit.  (We need an emoticon of a cricket chirping)

[ozbob]

http://backontrack.org/images/memes/crickets.mp3 < click !

[ozbob]

  bus reform, fare reform

If the state government was fair-dinkum, it would tackle these first.  Low-hanging fruit.  (We need an emoticon of a cricket chirping)

Struggling with all-door boarding bus ( > http://railbotforum.org/mbs/index.php?topic=11322.msg157343#msg157343  )

doesn't auger well for the future now does it?

[Gazza]

Why are they even seeking Fed funding for GCLRT stage 2....Reality check, we're talking a few km of tram line tacked onto a pre existing system. Hardly ripping up streets and sewers, and hardly a multi-billion big  hit of spending like say CRR that the state would struggle to pay for.
Stuff like this should be routine spending, just like the boggo rd busway etc.

[#Metro]

Struggling with all-door boarding bus ( > http://railbotforum.org/mbs/index.php?topic=11322.msg157343#msg157343  )

doesn't auger well for the future now does it?

They obviously need Federal Funding to open the back door of the bus. 

[James]

Why are they even seeking Fed funding for GCLRT stage 2....Reality check, we're talking a few km of tram line tacked onto a pre existing system. Hardly ripping up streets and sewers, and hardly a multi-billion big  hit of spending like say CRR that the state would struggle to pay for.
Stuff like this should be routine spending, just like the boggo rd busway etc.

It is the game of politics. If the Qld government pays for it, it means they either have to increase debt or raise taxes, neither of which is popular. If the federal government pays for it, that issue doesn't exist because the state government doesn't need to do the hard yards of funding. Anna 2.0 is milking this for all she can get for this reason - she can use it as an excuse to stall infrastructure that she doesn't have the money to build in the first place.

It is time the state government grew up and learnt that money does not grow on trees, and that sometimes strong choices (haha) need to be made in order to fund the state's infrastructure, which may involve raising taxes. Raising taxes: it isn't the be-all and end-all if it is only done for a short period of time (say 5-10 years).

[Gazza]

But why would you need to raise taxes or increase debt for a $600 mil project?

[ozbob]

News.com.au --> Opinion: Premier Palaszczuk shows no appetite for reform, just unfeasible megaprojects

... She writes that the CRR project was "identified as the number-one requirement for the nation in Infrastructure Australia's (IA) last priority list".
True. But it shows how bad IA's due diligence was of the business-case assumptions.

That business case was based on internally prepared and since discredited passenger-demand forecasts. The nightmare scenario it painted of bottlenecks on the Merivale (rail) Bridge by 2015 has simply not eventuated.

The Newman government shrank CRR into the $5 billion BaT Tunnel, but even that project's economics were dubious, and hard-headed LNP ministers were having serious doubts in late 2014.

Mega-projects are risky, and governments should opt for a big-bang solution only when all other options have been exhausted. The global evidence makes for sober reading. Across hundreds of projects reviewed by Professor Bent Flyvbjerg's team at Oxford University, on average, demand forecasts were double actual demand, and costs were estimated to be half of final costs ...

Some interesting viewpoints ...

[dancingmongoose]

She writes that the CRR project was "identified as the number-one requirement for the nation in Infrastructure Australia's (IA) last priority list".
True. But it shows how bad IA's due diligence was of the business-case assumptions.
That business case was based on internally prepared and since discredited passenger-demand forecasts. The nightmare scenario it painted of bottlenecks on the Merivale (rail) Bridge by 2015 has simply not eventuated.

It didn't eventuate because of the ridiculous fare hikes that have happened in the past 5 or so years. I think it's safe to assume the demand would be higher had the fares not gone up.

[verbatim9]

Apart from Coomera to Helensvale Duplication and Light Rail. 4 big ones that are to be completed by 2022 are Beerburrum to Nambour duplication, CRR, Eastern and Northern Busway plus rail duplication/Electrification out to Gatton (dual guage sleepers and integration into the TransLink Network).

[Stillwater]

News.com is saying that Queensland's lazy rhetoric about bad old Canberra and the slogans like 'we want our share' and 'show is the money' are no substitute for effective planning and good policy.  Where is the strategic planning; where is the vision and policy?  And where are the action plans to get us there, driven by Queensland-based thinking and solutions?  End the cargo cult mentality Ms Palazczcuk and Ms Trad.  Make decisions, even if they are hard.  You will get more respect that way.

[SurfRail]

plus rail duplication/Electrification out to Gatton (dual guage sleepers and integration into the TransLink Network).

Absolutely no point in this unless/until there is a new corridor built for the Inland Rail project, which would be dual gauge from day 1.  If electrified it would need to accommodate double stacked containers, so it might be easier to n9t put wires up and just stick with something like a shortened commuter only diesel tilt train.

[verbatim9]

No DMUs that would mean train changes and localised pollution
Electrification can be done and not new,  to support stacked containers at least to Gatton or if not Toowoomba https://2.bp.blogspot.com/-1BbF3QiAd-0/Ui9YbpGk-8I/AAAAAAAACC4/Skzmp1iCK5Q/s1600/container+clear+elec+lines.jpg

[ozbob]

Hybrid electrics are around now.  These can run under wires to Rosewood and then own resources to Gatton (on board batteries and regenerative charging).

Hold on Bob!!  Huh?  You are in Queensland .. oh that's right ...

[Gazza]

Apart from Coomera to Helensvale Duplication and Light Rail. 4 big ones that are to be completed by 2022 are Beerburrum to Nambour duplication, CRR, Eastern and Northern Busway plus rail duplication/Electrification out to Gatton (dual guage sleepers and integration into the TransLink Network).

Why would rail to Gatton be a priority?

CAMCOS, Trouts Rd et would all generate more Pax.

[verbatim9]

Makes sense location of Uni, Semi Urban Growth hub, Takes pressure off commuting on the Warrego Hwy between Gatton Ipswich/Brisbane Suburbs. Plus Train link to Brisbane Airport for people at Gatton and Toowoomba (Park n Ride @ Gatton)

[James]

Can we please get trains running every 15 minutes on any train line on weekends* please before we start divulging into trains running to Gatton? (*Ignoring combined frequency provided Darra - Northgate - Park Road.)

The bus service out there (539) doesn't even meet every train and the Rosewood train runs as an hourly 3-car shuttle and half-hourly in peak hour as through services. I wouldn't support a rail link until the level of service out there is at least every 15 minutes in peak hour. What matters is the frequency and quality of service provided, not whether it is on a shiny train or on an electrified line.

Brisbane needs CRR, the Gold Coast needs GCLRT Stage 2 and the Sunshine Coast needs Beerburrum - Landsborough duplication, and that's about it for a while. No need for busways or anything else until we make proper utilisation of our existing bus resources and railway network.

[Arnz]

CAMCOS has taken Moreton Bay Rail Link's old role as the "never never" rail and "Foamer's dream" political football. 

Saying that, the local social media crowd on the SCD are split with 50/50 between CAMCOS and Beerburrum - L'sborough - Nambour duplication, although some arguing on the CAMCOS side are a bit foamy by claiming they could do it without the duplication (yay for the 'Maglev Bus to Maroochydore' that elevates over a conflicting move and/or service). 

However, duplication beyond Landsborough would have a stronger case than CAMCOS from a national freight network perspective, which benefits the state and the nation overall as a whole over the majority of passenger only rail projects (the exception being the CRR).

[verbatim9]

Hybrid electrics are around now.  These can run under wires to Rosewood and then own resources to Gatton (on board batteries and regenerative charging).

Hold on Bob!!  Huh?  You are in Queensland .. oh that's right ...

Even though I am open to new tech such as Hybrid Electric Trains. Better to stick to traditional Electric. At least you can make use of all existing rail stock. Easier to maintain as well. Maybe Hybrid Electrics next tender from 2030-35