Cross River Rail Project

[mufreight]

Active members would be no more than 40.

How do you define active, is it only those who make posts or is it those who are members who access the site and over what period, a day, a week or a month.
The site has frequently more than 4000 people view it in a day so one would presume that the number of active members would depending on your definition of an active member be considerably higher than your estimated 40.   

[somebody]

There could be a number of lurking members, but I think the numbers making regular posts is less than 40 anyway.

[STB]

Stop worrying and give up. We already know the questions are all going to be a farce with serious topics (not) like fluoridation, prostitution, homosexual marriage, abortions, daylight savings and probably nude beaches as well.

Err, Same Sex Marriage is actually an issue that's very close for me and definitely not trivial and affects a lot more people than one might think! Something I hope that both sides of politics actually follow through on.

[O_128]

Stop worrying and give up. We already know the questions are all going to be a farce with serious topics (not) like fluoridation, prostitution, homosexual marriage, abortions, daylight savings and probably nude beaches as well.

Err, Same Sex Marriage is actually an issue that's very close for me and definitely not trivial and affects a lot more people than one might think! Something I hope that both sides of politics actually follow through on.

I agree, But like abortion its not critical to the state and really is a federal issue.

[STB]

Stop worrying and give up. We already know the questions are all going to be a farce with serious topics (not) like fluoridation, prostitution, homosexual marriage, abortions, daylight savings and probably nude beaches as well.

Err, Same Sex Marriage is actually an issue that's very close for me and definitely not trivial and affects a lot more people than one might think! Something I hope that both sides of politics actually follow through on.

I agree, But like abortion its not critical to the state and really is a federal issue.

Yes, a federal issue but the state does have to set an example with civil partnerships.  So sorry, but I strongly disagree with you.  Also, slightly unpleasant how you linked abortion to same sex marriage in terms of how critical it is (although it was probably unintentional).

[Stillwater]

It is not critical that the CRR question doesn't get up.  Mr Newman will not be able to dodge the CRR bullet forever.  For instance, if Infrastructure Australia makes known its intention to fund CRR before the state election, he will have a posse of journalists camping on his doorstep, asking whether or not he will build it when premier.

[mufreight]

Still would have been nice to have him asked the question, it is remarkable that somehow a question that was around the 270 votes this morning has now overtaken the CRR question by more than 700 votes, someone has been busy and organised.

[Stillwater]

Agree.  But our question will get asked - just feed it to a journo to ask at Can Do's next media conference.

[Mr X]

The gay panic one now has more than 3000 votes?

Must have been in a newspaper or something. It was at 1200 or so yesterday.

And where did that environmental one crop up from?

I agree with STB; gay marriage is important to me and by having QLD recognise civil unions I think it sends a strong message to Canberra (especially Abbott!) that the people care about this issue and want change. I will be disgusted if the LNP repeal it; the sh%t Katter spikes about "I'll walk backwards to Broome if the gay pop in north qld is more than 0.000001%" is bad enough! (HIS OWN BROTHER IS GAY).
So yes the gay one and CRR are the two most important for me personally 

/RANT

[ozbob]

From the Couriermail 20th February 2012 pages 22 and 23

Melbourne shows how Brisbane can embrace the Cross River project

[#Metro]

If the LNP don't support CRR (which I genuinely doubt) then they need to explain how they're going to introduce 15 min frequencies statewide.

[BrizCommuter]

If the LNP don't support CRR (which I genuinely doubt) then they need to explain how they're going to introduce 15 min frequencies statewide.

Statewide? Maybe SE Queensland wide.

15 mins off-peak on most lines can be introduced without CRR. However, some non-CRR infrastructure projects would be required for some lines.

[HappyTrainGuy]

They do tend to get some allright loadings but nothing special as the run is limited/close to the city. However they do help reduce the higher loadings on other services (Beenleigh/Kuraby) and maximise the capacity as that bloody annoying XPT reserves the dual gauage track for pretty much the entire peak hour when DLS isn't used across the border.

[somebody]

They do tend to get some allright loadings but nothing special as the run is limited/close to the city. However they do help reduce the higher loadings on other services (Beenleigh/Kuraby) and maximise the capacity as that bloody annoying XPT reserves the dual gauage track for pretty much the entire peak hour when DLS isn't used across the border.

Thanks, well if you were able to grab those services and start them from Greenbank (and beyond) and looking at the timetable you might also be able to squeeze in another 1 or 2 services here and there and get about 4-5 trains per hour off Greenbank. But I can see why with increased popularity of the existing routes Greenbank has really had to take a back step and wait for CRR.

I suppose this is where "Can do"'s plan kicks in to enable more trains, short term as it maybe. Not everyone on any line is actually coming to the city (from personal experience) actually enters the city from south or west and if there was a shunt neck you could look at terminating a train at Sth Bris and Milton? for the masses who alight at these inner suburb stations and encourge them to use a train with seats over the city bound ones.

regards
Shane

That's also the bureaucrats plan based on my conversations with them.  I think we can safely ignore the "clarification" of longer platforms at South Brisbane.  Actually Sth Bris termination could be done relatively easily if you add a couple of crossovers to allow a centre turnback on the middle platform.

There is a better option - add stops to the Gold Coast trains to pick up standing passengers.

[SteelPan]

What the CM "Melbourne Article" shows is how backward the CM really is.  Here we are, in 2012 and the "broadsheet quality newspaper you can read in the easy to handle format of a tabloid"          excuse me, while I   again and    again - anyway, finally the CM does some weird article embracing the benefits of Melb trams and the how many years old now Melb underground? - I mean, next the "broadsheet quality newspaper you can read in the easy to handle format of a tabloid" will be telling all us Brissy 3rd world dwellers about the whizz-bang benefits of e-lec-tric-ity, to make lights go on at night!!! and how, running water can suddenly appear when taps are turned on - shows what they really think of  their thong wearing, shirtless "Brissy" readers - mmmaaatteee!    

[SurfRail]

I think its perfectly reflective of how backwards things really are here.  (Not that I complain too much outside of PT and generalised government incompetence - I still live here, am not inclined to move and am not a masochist.)

[ozbob]

From the Brisbanetimes click here!

Underground rail network hinges on federal meeting

Underground rail network hinges on federal meeting
Daniel Hurst
February 23, 2012 - 3:00AM

The Bligh government's hopes of securing crucial federal funds for its $8 billion Brisbane underground rail project may rest on a key meeting to be held this week.

brisbanetimes.com.au has learnt the federal government's advisory body, Infrastructure Australia, will hold a board meeting by the end of this week to consider numerous projects including the cross-river rail proposal.

Premier Anna Bligh has described the flagship transport project as crucial in resolving looming capacity constraints on southeast Queensland's passenger rail network.

However, Liberal National Party leader Campbell Newman has predicted the federal government would not "bail out" the state and labelled the project "an $8 billion unfunded fantasy".

Infrastructure Australia advises the federal government on the nation's key infrastructure priorities and determines whether there is a business case to invest taxpayers' funds.

The IA board, which meets every two months and is due to gather this week, may recommend that the federal government fund the cross-river rail project or could seek further information.

Ms Bligh said yesterday the state government had "been in constant discussions with the federal government" over the important project's funding.

The Labor state government argues the cross-river rail project is transformative and will address the key north-south capacity issue with an extra inner-city rail crossing in addition to the existing Merivale Bridge.

The project would include an 18 kilometre north-south railway line, of which 10 kilometres would be in underground tunnels from Yeerongpilly to Victoria Park.

The project would feature four new underground train stations at Boggo Road, Woolloongabba, Albert Street and Roma Street, two new surface stations at Yeerongpilly and the RNA Exhibition Grounds, and upgrades to the Rocklea and Moorooka stations.

Infrastructure Australia is an independent statutory body set up by the federal government in 2008 to provide advice on funding priorities.

Its council, headed by chairman Sir Rod Eddington, meets every two months and usually submits its annual list of funding priorities and assessments to the Council of Australian Governments towards the middle of each year.

However, it is understood federal Infrastructure and Transport Minister Anthony Albanese may ask for Infrastructure Australia's latest advice on any project at any time, if he wishes.

In June 2010, Infrastructure Australia found the cross-river rail project had "real potential" but was not yet ready to proceed.

In June 2011, Infrastructure Australia acknowledged extensive work had been done since the last submission and upgraded the project's status to "threshold", meaning it was still not quite ready to go ahead but the nod was a step closer.

However, in December, Mr Newman dismissed the "grandiose" cross-river rail project's prospects of receiving federal cash.

"It is never going to happen. There is no money for that. The federal government are not going to bail them out," Mr Newman told brisbanetimes.com.au.

The LNP has proposed several measures it says will address looming capacity issues, including introducing new signalling systems to reduce the gap between trains and adding an extra platform at South Bank and South Brisbane stations to help ensure trains did not have to wait as long before loading and unloading passengers.

The state government in January 2011 delayed construction of the cross-river rail project by two years, citing the budgetary impact of the floods, with completion now not expected until about 2020.

This is despite advice to the government that the only inner-city rail bridge over the Brisbane River would reach full capacity in 2016.

Late last year, the state government announced it had again placed cross-river rail at the top of its priority list as part of its latest submission to Infrastructure Australia. It argues the project will now be "ready to proceed".

LNP transport spokesman Scott Emerson has previously refused to say whether a Newman government would even consider proceeding with the cross-river rail project if the federal government stumped up the cash needed.

"That's a hypothetical question because so far, twice before, Infrastructure Australia has not provided any funds and there's no indication they're going to do it any time in the future," he said in December, when the possibility of a pre-election funding deal was raised in the media.

"The state government is broke and the federal government is looking to save every dollar possible at the moment."

The federal government has previously chipped in $20 million to fund the cross-river rail planning and feasibility assessment stage.

Robert Dow, from commuter lobby group Rail Back on Track, recently said he was confident the case for the project was strong, given it would provide network-wide benefits for rail commuters and free up lines for freight trains.

The state election will occur on March 24 and the Bligh government is set for a thumping defeat, according to a series of published opinion polls.

Read more: http://www.brisbanetimes.com.au/queensland/state-election-2012/underground-rail-network-hinges-on-federal-meeting-20120222-1tog3.html

[Golliwog]

There's an update to that now, they asked Mr Newman what he would do if the fed's funded it. Apparently he has a policy announcement in the works for the LNP's solution to the CRR problem.

[ozbob]

Update, we can probably guess what their ' specific policy ' is, a non-solution, a couple of extra platforms and signalling improvements (improvements already in train) ...

Fail!

From the Brisbanetimes click here!

LNP refuses to buy into cross-river rail project

LNP refuses to buy into cross-river rail project
Tony Moore and Daniel Hurst
February 23, 2012 - 3:05PM

LNP Campbell Newman has promised to unveil a "specific policy'' to deal with rail capacity problems in southeast Queensland.

But he will not buy into the issue of Brisbane's cross-river rail project, which may receive the green light for further funding after a crucial meeting in Canberra this week.

Mr Newman initially supported cross-river rail before he began to look for less expensive options.

Today he would not elaborate on the LNP's plans for improving the rail travel across the Brisbane River, a crucial problem in Brisbane's public transport peak hour gridlock.

"No, we will be announcing a specific policy to do with the rail capacity issues in Southeast Queensland during this campaign, so just wait and see,'' he said in Mackay.

The Bligh government's hopes of securing crucial federal funds for its $8 billion Brisbane underground rail project may rest on a key meeting to be held this week.

brisbanetimes.com.au has learnt the federal government's advisory body, Infrastructure Australia, will hold a board meeting by the end of this week to consider numerous projects including the cross-river rail proposal.

Premier Anna Bligh has described the flagship transport project as crucial in resolving looming capacity constraints on southeast Queensland's passenger rail network.

However, Mr Newman has predicted the federal government would not "bail out" the state and labelled the project "an $8 billion unfunded fantasy".

Infrastructure Australia advises the federal government on the nation's key infrastructure priorities and determines whether there is a business case to invest taxpayers' funds.

The IA board, which meets every two months and is due to gather this week, may recommend that the federal government fund the cross-river rail project or could seek further information.

Ms Bligh said yesterday the state government had "been in constant discussions with the federal government" over the important project's funding.

The Labor state government argues the cross-river rail project is transformative and will address the key north-south capacity issue with an extra inner-city rail crossing in addition to the existing Merivale Bridge.

The project would include an 18 kilometre north-south railway line, of which 10 kilometres would be in underground tunnels from Yeerongpilly to Victoria Park.

The project would feature four new underground train stations at Boggo Road, Woolloongabba, Albert Street and Roma Street, two new surface stations at Yeerongpilly and the RNA Exhibition Grounds, and upgrades to the Rocklea and Moorooka stations.

Infrastructure Australia is an independent statutory body set up by the federal government in 2008 to provide advice on funding priorities.

Its council, headed by chairman Sir Rod Eddington, meets every two months and usually submits its annual list of funding priorities and assessments to the Council of Australian Governments towards the middle of each year.

However, it is understood federal Infrastructure and Transport Minister Anthony Albanese may ask for Infrastructure Australia's latest advice on any project at any time, if he wishes.

In June 2010, Infrastructure Australia found the cross-river rail project had "real potential" but was not yet ready to proceed.

In June 2011, Infrastructure Australia acknowledged extensive work had been done since the last submission and upgraded the project's status to "threshold", meaning it was still not quite ready to go ahead but the nod was a step closer.

However, in December, Mr Newman dismissed the "grandiose" cross-river rail project's prospects of receiving federal cash.

"It is never going to happen. There is no money for that. The federal government are not going to bail them out," Mr Newman told brisbanetimes.com.au.

The LNP has proposed several measures it says will address looming capacity issues, including introducing new signalling systems to reduce the gap between trains and adding an extra platform at South Bank and South Brisbane stations to help ensure trains did not have to wait as long before loading and unloading passengers.

The state government in January 2011 delayed construction of the cross-river rail project by two years, citing the budgetary impact of the floods, with completion now not expected until about 2020.

This is despite advice to the government that the only inner-city rail bridge over the Brisbane River would reach full capacity in 2016.

Late last year, the state government announced it had again placed cross-river rail at the top of its priority list as part of its latest submission to Infrastructure Australia. It argues the project will now be "ready to proceed".

LNP transport spokesman Scott Emerson has previously refused to say whether a Newman government would even consider proceeding with the cross-river rail project if the federal government stumped up the cash needed.

"That's a hypothetical question because so far, twice before, Infrastructure Australia has not provided any funds and there's no indication they're going to do it any time in the future," he said in December, when the possibility of a pre-election funding deal was raised in the media.

"The state government is broke and the federal government is looking to save every dollar possible at the moment."

The federal government has previously chipped in $20 million to fund the cross-river rail planning and feasibility assessment stage.

Robert Dow, from commuter lobby group Rail Back on Track, recently said he was confident the case for the project was strong, given it would provide network-wide benefits for rail commuters and free up lines for freight trains.

The state election will occur on March 24 and the Bligh government is set for a thumping defeat, according to a series of published opinion polls.

Read more: http://www.brisbanetimes.com.au/queensland/state-election-2012/lnp-refuses-to-buy-into-crossriver-rail-project-20120222-1tog3.html

[mufreight]

No Policies Newman has outwitted himself on this one, his failure to listen to logic for the sake of politicial expediency, his refusal to consult and his lame duck incompetent shadow transport minister and equaly incompetent advisers has already and will continue to cost the LNP votes.
The tactic of refusing to espouse his solutions for the lack of public transport public transport infrastructure until there is insufficent time for voters to closely examin them and the half baked stop gap proposals that eminated through one orifice of the shadow transport spokesperson Mr Emerson is doomed to failure and is costing both the LNJP and Newman votes.
Too many voters have been affected by pathetic service frequencies, delays due to the failures to properly maintain the public transport system, particularly rail, the overpriced and becoming even more unaffordable fare structure and the financial sinkhole that is Translink.
Voters have a right to have answers to all of these points yet the LNP under the gideing hand of the egotistical power hungry No Policies Newman has provided nothing other than hot air and porkbarreling spin in relation to projects that remain dependent on Federal funding

[#Metro]

The LNP has proposed several measures it says will address looming capacity issues, including introducing new signalling systems to reduce the gap between trains and adding an extra platform at South Bank and South Brisbane stations to help ensure trains did not have to wait as long before loading and unloading passengers.

Sit tight people - it will undoubtedly be something completely crazy like a metro or cleveland solution or even 'Fairfield' solution!
Watch this space!

[somebody]

Perhaps LNP will win but Newman will lose. 

[O_128]

The LNP has proposed several measures it says will address looming capacity issues, including introducing new signalling systems to reduce the gap between trains and adding an extra platform at South Bank and South Brisbane stations to help ensure trains did not have to wait as long before loading and unloading passengers.

Sit tight people - it will undoubtedly be something completely crazy like a metro or cleveland solution or even 'Fairfield' solution!
Watch this space!

More like the ashgrove solution.

"we are at capacity due to ferny grove trains taking up slots, as such I will terminate the ferny grove line at alderly and build a busway to bowen hills, therefore allowing more trains to be run"  

[Jonas Jade]

Or reroute CRR to terminate in Ashgrove 

"There will be direct express services to the city and Gold Coast from Ashgrove - interchange at Paddington station for the Maroon Cityglider to South Bank*!!!!"




*Grey St, South Bank, not the actual station.

[Stillwater]

Let's call Mr Newman's unnamed proposal for easing SEQ's rail congestion woes the 'Newman Solution'.  If it is substantially different from anything that's been proposed before, the concept will need to be worked from the ground up.  That is another five years of working through concept, public consultation, engineering considerations, final plans, costings, buying of the land needed for new track etc and about a year of negotiations with the federal government over fundings aspects.  A start would be made on the Newman Solution in 2017 (one year after congestion crisis hits in 2016) and it would finish about four years later in 2021.

It would appear that Mr Newman is thinking at other ways $8 billion in federal funding could be spent.  This is folly.

The $8 billion the Bligh government is seeking is for a specific project (CRR).  It is both the project and the federal financial contribution towards its cost that is approved not by a Queensland state government, but by a government in Canberra acting on advice from Infrastructure Australia.

Mr Newman's refusal of the $8 billion for CRR, should it be offered, would set back the cause of a SEQ rail capacity enhancement at least five years and most probably 10 years.  It would be eroneous thinking to believe that what might be on offer is $8 billion in unattached federal money that an LNP government could repackage in some other way (the so-called Newman Solution).  Just as it has done with CRR, the federal government would need to be convinced of the benefits of any new proposal the LNP has in mind to redirect federal funds.

The risk the LNP runs is that if CRR is delayed while a new set of transport initiatives is worked up, any money that could be coming from the feds would be re-directed away from Queensland to a worthwhile 'shovel ready' public transport project in another state.  Getting it back would be difficult.

It is a high stakes gamble.

[#Metro]

Let us see what they have before we jump to conclusions.
I suspect a metro will be involved, and potential for trains to terminate at South Brisbane.

Hopefully we have enough technical expertise on this forum to do deep analysis of whatever is put forward (signalling, new platforms, metros, whatever).

This is just my personal speculations though!

[Mr X]

Given the financial position we are seeing the state in, I'm not holding my hopes high for anything significant.

[Stillwater]

The conclusions are not to be 'jumped to'.  They exist.  ALP backs CRR, LNP backs an alternative, as yet to be defined. Mention of a possible metro, backed by the LNP, is jumping to a conclusion.  We don't know what the LNP has in mind, they just dont have the current CRR proposal in mind.  That is fact, not conjecture.  The issue is not the nature of the infrastructure that will fix SEQ's looming rail capacity crisis, or the technical attributes of one solution or another, it is the money.  It has always been the money.

Yes, there is technical expertise in this forum to critique any transport solutions put forward.  A merchant banker or a money forger have yet to emerge in this forum, I believe.

The key to this is federal money for a state problem.  The feds are talking turkey around CRR.  A radical deviation in the plan takes us back to go.  Focus on the money and the process whereby the feds need reassurance that the investment they are being requested to make represents a solution that will work and gives value for money.

[#Metro]

As I said, let us see what they come up with. Whatever it is, it is under wraps for now.
There are not that many days left and soon enough everything will be on the table.

[Fares_Fair]

What everyone seems to ignore is that the Queensland Government has said it will not contribute a cent to CRR until they are in surplus, and that is not planned until 2014/15, as I understand it.

Other infrastructure projects have been delayed to help 'create' the surplus, the Sunshine Coast's CoastConnect program is one of these, delaying it 12 months to save $18m.

CRR is another expensive glossy brochured pipe dream by the Queensland Government, and it is totally reliant on the Federal Government picking up near 100% of the $8B tab for it.

Yes CRR is very good and yes CRR is needed - it's just that clearly Queensland cannot afford it, and I guess we'll find out if the Commonwealth can.
The answer may well come at the end of this week.

Regards,
Fares_Fair.

[#Metro]

WARNING: MY PERSONAL SPECULATION ONLY

This is what we know so far, but is just 'discussion bubbles' not concrete policy:
http://www.brisbanetimes.com.au/queensland/newmans-metro-plan-blasted-20110318-1c0jo.html

"Instead of putting $8 billion into cross river rail we could for between $3 and $4 billion total, get 40 kilometres of inner-city subway in Brisbane, with probably at least 25 to 30 stations, using the technology that was put forward in Barcelona.

Read more: http://www.brisbanetimes.com.au/queensland/newmans-metro-plan-blasted-20110318-1c0jo.html#ixzz1nCkqg5A9

We know the costs of "$3-4 billion" for 40 km are utter fantasy in our urban context, particularly when you factor in the fact that E.Busway was $465 million for ONE kilometre and that is just for buses. The alternative though is a metro down the SE busway where at South Brisbane services would terminate and pour into an NSS. This is speculation purely of my own, but it would then explain also why they strangely believe that upgrading platforms at South Brisbane is going to do anything.

It would also significantly lower the cost as the busway ROW is already aquired and solve the SE busway capacity issues in one go by merging the two problems together.

Brisbane also has more train stations than Toronto and we have busways on top of that, so any poor PT is due to POOR FREQUENCY and SPAN OF HOURS and the infrastructure limitations that imposes, rather than an access issue. This is very important to realise this before anyone suggests more stations on every street corner (aka 'Rail everywhere') is the solution.

http://blogs.crikey.com.au/theurbanist/2012/02/15/why-do-subways-cost-so-much-to-build-here-than-elsewhere/

[Golliwog]

I expect the LNP cross river rail alternative announcement to be done on the same day as the result of the IA meeting is made clear. If it comes up 'no', maximum political mileage to hound them on the cost. If 'yes', they can probably still spin it as a Labor mates thing.

[Fares_Fair]

What everyone seems to ignore is that the Queensland Government has said it will not contribute a cent to CRR until they are in surplus, and that is not planned until 2014/15, as I  understand it.

Other infrastructure projects have been delayed to help 'create' the surplus, the Sunshine Coast's CoastConnect program is one of these, delaying it 12 months to save $18m.

CRR is another expensive glossy brochured pipe dream by the Queensland Government, and it is totally reliant on the Federal Government picking up near 100% of the $8B tab for it.

Yes CRR is very good and yes CRR is needed - it's just that clearly Queensland cannot afford it, and I guess we'll find out if the Commonwealth can.
The answer may well come at the end of this week.

Regards,
Fares_Fair.

Further, and perhaps a more cynical view, given that there is a remote possibility the CRR tab of $8 Billion is ready to be handed out.
Will the Federal Government want to hand out such a goodly sum to a most-likely LNP government that all the pollsters say may occur, come 24 March?

To give or not to give?
That is the question.

Regards,
Fares_Fair.

[mufreight]

As I said, let us see what they come up with. Whatever it is, it is under wraps for now.
There are not that many days left and soon enough everything will be on the table.

The majority of voters abhore this take us on trust tactic of the LNP not releasing its policies in sufficent time to be scrutinised and evaluated. 
Having been burned by previous Governments the trust us and then we will repudiate any of our espousals once we are in power approach has worn thin.
The further delay of many years for a half baked stop gap proposal will save nothing and the economic costs of such delay the state can not afford.

[ozbob]

Sent to all outlets:

24 February 2012

Cross River Rail

Greetings,

Cross River Rail is an essential project for positioning the suburban/interurban rail network in south-east Queensland for the future.  It is not a question of can we afford it, it is a really a question of can we afford not to do it.

Recent media in Brisbanetimes ( http://www.brisbanetimes.com.au/queensland/state-election-2012/underground-rail-network-hinges-on-federal-meeting-20120222-1tog3.html ) suggests the LNP remains equivocal with Cross River Rail.

A few extra platforms and a notional signalling upgrade (already in underway) will do nothing to address the capacity issues.  Pie in the sky solutions such as the 'Cleveland Solution', interestingly trumped rather quickly by the LNPs plan to increase train service frequency on the Ferny Grove, are nonsense.

Bipartisan support is needed for Cross River Rail.  This is a project that has had years of rigorous evaluation, design and study.   To condemn south-east Queensland to transport failure and terminal gridlock on political whim is increasingly concerning to all citizens.

One only has to read the blogs.

We again call for bipartisan support for Cross River Rail.  It is essential.

Best wishes
Robert

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


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

Media release 22 January 2012 re-released 24 February 2012

SEQ: Cross River Rail bipartisan support is the way forward

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 Cross River Rail project to be implemented as soon as possible and all parties to commit to this project of national significance.

Robert Dow, Spokesman for RAIL Back On Track said:

"Cross River Rail has had years of detailed work up. Compare this  to the so called  'Cleveland Solution' thought bubble(1, 2), so rushed and mediocre that the published route forgot about Kurilpa bridge! The Cleveland solution is actually a non-solution, which will cost nearly as much as Cross River Rail and only give about a quarter of the capacity benefits that Cross River Rail will deliver for the entire rail network in south-east Queensland."

"It would be a disgrace and a tragedy for Queensland, and indirectly for Australia, if petty politics by Mayors, clearly out of touch with reality jeopardise the important project which is Cross River Rail.  If you recall they were once soundly behind it, until Mr Newman left their fold."

"Cross River Rail is an all inclusive cost, properly costed, evaluated and tested. Contrast to the very sloppy and hastily drawn up Cleveland non-solution thought bubble which at first critical examination fails dismally (2)."

"Competition for Infrastructure Australia funding will now be more intense considering  Melbourne, Sydney, Adelaide and Perth have major rail projects in train.  Any further delays with moving ahead with Cross River Rail could mean missing the train at Albert Street Station and gridlock for the next 50 years.  It is important that all political parties support Cross River Rail.  Not proceeding with Cross River Rail will cripple the economy of south-east Queensland as gridlock and transport failure impacts."

References:

1.   http://www.councilofmayorsseq.qld.gov.au/docs/Publications/COMSEQ-Public-Transport-in-SEQ_LOW-RES.pdf

2.   http://railbotforum.org/mbs/index.php?topic=7475.0

Contact:

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

[Stillwater]

Here is the Letter of Transmittal from the Queensland Government to the Federal Minister for Infrastructure and Transport, the Hon. Anthony Albanese MP, which confirms in writing that the state does not intend putting one dollar towards the cost to government of the Cross River Rail project.  It is the Bligh Labor government's position that the entire $8 billion cost be met from the federal government and the private sector.  The federal government, and not the state government, provided $20 million for the feasibility investigations leading to preparation of the Business Case for CRR.

http://www.dlgp.qld.gov.au/resources/infrastructure-funding/letter-transmittal-minister-albanese.pdf

[SurfRail]

Here is the Letter of Transmittal from the Queensland Government to the Federal Minister for Infrastructure and Transport, the Hon. Anthony Albanese MP, which confirms in writing that the state does not intend putting one dollar towards the cost to government of the Cross River Rail project.  It is the Bligh Labor government's position that the entire $8 billion cost be met from the federal government and the private sector.  The federal government, and not the state government, provided $20 million for the feasibility investigations leading to preparation of the Business Case for CRR.

http://www.dlgp.qld.gov.au/resources/infrastructure-funding/letter-transmittal-minister-albanese.pdf

Until the budget returns to surplus. 

Frankly, that is a bogus limitation.  The State should be borrowing to build this, because it will over time pay for itself, and scrapping other less essential projects which will not pay for themselves.

[#Metro]

I think it is a bit of a big ask to get $8 billion and not contribute anything given that it is the state that will benefit the most from this. On the other hand this is a bit analogous to upgrading the M1, particularly with interstate freight relief etc.

Still don't get why LNP is so against (?) this, they're not paying for it anyway!

[Jonas Jade]

I think it is a bit of a big ask to get $8 billion and not contribute anything given that it is the state that will benefit the most from this. On the other hand this is a bit analogous to upgrading the M1, particularly with interstate freight relief etc.

Still don't get why LNP is so against (?) this, they're not paying for it anyway!

I don't think they'd get the whole $8b from IA. They'd get the cash to begin works, and then the state would probably be expected to start chipping in once they could. You don't spend the whole $8b upfront. So it would likely be staged contributions.

Still, I agree that it's a bit rich of Queensland to basically say, we really really really need this money for this project, but we're not going to contribute anything to it upfront.

I honestly thought the LNP would hold back until the IA announcements.....

[somebody]

I honestly thought the LNP would hold back until the IA announcements.....

I think they still will.  If IA is meeting this week, it would be daft to announce a policy until the results of that meeting are known.