Cross River Rail Project

[Fares_Fair]

Total CRR cost now = $6.4 billion

Compising:
Commonwealth contribution = $3.98 billion (over 7 years)
Queensland contribution = $2.42 billion (over 7 years) EDIT: note added -this figure includes private sector input

I'm not sure how our small $60 million surplus in 2014/15 will asssist this case.

[#Metro]

IA has established the assessment guidelines for major new infrastructure projects.  They are available on the IA website, and include assessment methodologies for social, environmental and urban renewal qualities of any proposed project, in addition to transport benefits in the case of a transport project.  They are the guidelines.

There's nothing illogical about using NPV, NPV is a complimentary metric and most projects calculate and appraise both because BCR has its own inherent limitations (BCR measures a ratio, NPV describes and absolute magnitude).

Anyway, minutae aside, the cost of CRR just went down and the benefits went up. So the bottom of Mr Newman's boat fell out it seems...

[ozbob]

Total CRR cost now = $6.4 billion

Compising:
Commonwealth contribution = $3.98 billion (over 7 years)
Queensland contribution = $2.42 billion (over 7 years)

I'm not sure how our small $60 million surplus in 2014/15 will asssist this case.

You are forgetting value capture/private funding for a start.

Excellent value for the outcomes ...

[Fares_Fair]

Hi TT
You are assuming that the reduction in costs has not also resulted in a reduction of the cost benefit, previously reported as $9 billion.

[Fares_Fair]

Total CRR cost now = $6.4 billion

Compising:
Commonwealth contribution = $3.98 billion (over 7 years)
Queensland contribution = $2.42 billion (over 7 years)

I'm not sure how our small $60 million surplus in 2014/15 will asssist this case.

You are forgetting value capture/private funding for a start.

Excellent value for the outcomes ...

True, Queensland's component includes private sector input, corrected my post above.

[#Metro]

LOL, look what I found in the brief:

http://www.infrastructureaustralia.gov.au/2011_coag/project_assessments.aspx

Need for government funding: The project contends that the effectiveness of complementary revenue options is limited. Further evidence is required to justify the rejection of options such as congestion charging and parking levies, and of rejecting fare increases over the Consumer Price Index.

[#Metro]

  YAY!

[ozbob]

YAY!

[#Metro]

He can say what he likes, but the money provided by IA is extremely fixed, Bazza found this out in NSW last year and he just wanted to change the direction of a railway line heading west from Epping station. So basically Campbell can spend $1.3B on CRR or many billions more on a metro or any other solution he can  think of but none of it will be funded from the CRR pool of cash made available by IA. Any new project will need to restart the whole process.

If its likely Anna and Feds will annouce this project go ahead shortly as part of election campaign, Campbell has his back against the wall and a good Journo will force his hand in questioning. It will be extremely difficult for Campbell to say he has a better idea to this funding option on a project that Campbell has never actually opposed on its techical merit or usefullness to Brisbane Commuters. This is probably why they never released a transport policy.

Why do they say over 7 years, will it take the project that long? Chunnel was built faster.

All the LNP has is Octopus Ink to offer, they should get real.
Seriously, you can't just go to IA for funding of project X and then do a bait-and-switch tactic.

The LNP has not COMMITTED IN STONE what their alternative plan is.

LNP Cross River Rail (non?) policy in action:

[Stillwater]

Here's the latest from the LNP regarding CRR.  It would seem that we have only days to wait before learning the details of the LNP's alternative cross-river rail plan.  (Info from www.brisbanetimes.com.au):

On the Gold Coast, LNP leader Campbell Newman was claiming vindication after it emerged that the project would cost less than originally quoted.

"I've been saying for a long, long time that the figures we've been talking about were excessive, way too high," he said.

"But they [the ALP] said 'no, no, no, we're going for the gold medal award in spending taxpayer's money as fast as we can'.

"And I've said it was a fantasy, what I say is they're going to have to work harder because we're going to work harder.

"There are ways of getting better rail services to the Gold Coast, to the Sunshine Coast, across the Brisbane city river than spending even that amount of money."

When asked to say yes or no to stumping up the $1.3 billion, Mr Newman said: "we'll be talking about our plan for the cross-river rail capacity issue in the upcoming days''.

Opposition transport spokesman Scott Emerson said reduced price tag confirmed the Bligh Government's "con on voters'' over its Brisbane underground rail project.

"When you can magically cut the cost of a project by more than 25 per cent over three weeks, you know it's just an attempt at conning voters ahead of an election,'' Mr Emerson said.

"The [Transport] Minister has now also admitted it wants the Federal Government to fund more than 75 per cent or $4 billion of the $5.3 billion first stage of the project.

"With the Federal Government desperately trying to achieve a budget surplus, it's just another con on voters to expect the Federal Government will cough up $4 billion.''

[Fares_Fair]

Here's the latest from the LNP regarding CRR.  It would seem that we have only days to wait before learning the details of the LNP's alternative cross-river rail plan.  (Info from www.brisbanetimes.com.au):

On the Gold Coast, LNP leader Campbell Newman was claiming vindication after it emerged that the project would cost less than originally quoted.

"I've been saying for a long, long time that the figures we've been talking about were excessive, way too high," he said.

"But they [the ALP] said 'no, no, no, we're going for the gold medal award in spending taxpayer's money as fast as we can'.

"And I've said it was a fantasy, what I say is they're going to have to work harder because we're going to work harder.

"There are ways of getting better rail services to the Gold Coast, to the Sunshine Coast, across the Brisbane city river than spending even that amount of money."

When asked to say yes or no to stumping up the $1.3 billion, Mr Newman said: "we'll be talking about our plan for the cross-river rail capacity issue in the upcoming days''.

Opposition transport spokesman Scott Emerson said reduced price tag confirmed the Bligh Government's "con on voters'' over its Brisbane underground rail project.

"When you can magically cut the cost of a project by more than 25 per cent over three weeks, you know it's just an attempt at conning voters ahead of an election,'' Mr Emerson said.

"The [Transport] Minister has now also admitted it wants the Federal Government to fund more than 75 per cent or $4 billion of the $5.3 billion first stage of the project.

"With the Federal Government desperately trying to achieve a budget surplus, it's just another con on voters to expect the Federal Government will cough up $4 billion.''

Hmmm, I like the sound of that, we get a mention!
There could be big news coming - maybe.

and the Labor plan for the Sunshine Coast is what?

Maybe I'm jumping the gun here, best wait and see.

[ozbob]

Unless the core is sorted, there will be no real gains.

CRR is needed, without it the system will fail completely, roads and rail.

A few platforms at South Brisbane is not going to do anything for the Sunshine Coast or the Gold Coast in reality.  

[ozbob]

From the Couriermail 9th March 2012 page 5

Lift for Cross River Rail

[Stillwater]

The LNP Cross River Rail policy

Campbell Newman is the 'Little General', portrayed by Sir Alec Guiness, railing against the incompetence of the 'Captain Bligh' government, played here by the Japanese wartime Imperial Forces, in the classic 'Bridge Over the River Bris'.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JSf0Gz9l04M&feature=related

"We will build it better and cheaper."

[SteelPan]

Pleasing and perhaps not very suprising, that the overall estimated cost of CRR has headed south.  Regards BOTH political parties and CRR, a few thoughts.

1) The current ALP govt - to their credit, the have initiated and thus far "supported" the PROPOSAL.  It is of course a PROPOSAL along time coming.  Further, they have been quick to put the project on the back-burner, remember Fraser's strange rush to extend out the timeline in the midst of last years floods - waters were still rising and of all the issues he could address, it was the need to temporarily kill off CRR and I think a couple of randomly selected roads.

So, in summary, from the ALP, we have an unfunded PROPOSAL they have deferred development of at the first opportunity.  To use the words of ex Whitehouse Chief of Staff,  Rahm Emanuel, "never let a crisis go to waste" and regards CRR they didn't.

2) The Newman led LNP - like the ALP are a mixed bag at best when it comes to their infrastructure past performance.  Newman has been sadly indecisive regards the CRR PROPOSAL and it staggers me that he appears not to see the fundamental NEED for the project.  The one positive of his position, MAY BE, that he wants to see the feds really put dollars on the table and not just have Qld and the C'wealth dance endlessly around a half-hearted PROPOSAL.  I can see merit in this type of thinking and his METRO idea is, like CRR itself, long overdue and he deserves credit for PROPOSING it - NOT if it is at the expense of CRR however.

rail is clearly nolonger a Cinderella topic in elections, itself a big step forward.

[ozbob]

Media release 10 March 2012

SEQ: Cross River Rail Gold Plated? Saying so is short sighted!

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 has refuted the LNPs claims that the $6.4 Billion cost for Cross River Rail is gold plated.

Robert Dow, Spokesman for RAIL Back On Track said:

"Public transport planning in Australia has had a long history of cutting corners in crucial areas.

"Inevitably problems then develop that are disruptive to fix, and often cost more than the original project!

"For instance, the cost of duplicating the Gold Coast rail line from its original single track has cost more than when it was originally constructed, and the job still isn't done at Coomera!

"The same can be said for the proposed $2 billion cost of fixing the CBD busway bottleneck that was 'designed in' at the start, the Busway was built for $425 million in 2001.

"It's a double whammy for Queenslanders, because money is stretched spending on new infrastructure to keep up with growth, but also having to go back and fix up problems on existing infrastructure caused by bad design and penny pinching in the past.

"Cross River Rail represents one of the few examples where the design has thought of everything.

"The junctions are well designed, stations accommodate longer trains and are well located, track capacity looks not just at the immediate crunch from Gold and Sunshine Coast trains, but to long term expansions to cities like Flagstone, not yet built.

"6.4 billion dollars may seem like a lot of money, but it is exceptionally good value for an 18km rail project that solves several problems at once, has all future provisions from day one, and will be operating for the next 100 years plus.

"It seems incredibly biased that the $4.8 Billion spent on  6.5km of motorway tunnel plus 3km of Busway for Airport Link receives no complaint but an 18km rail project costing 25% more than this is accused of being wasteful and unaffordable by the LNP.

"The core of the network is the most crucial part, Cross River Rail is south east Queensland's most crucial infrastructure project. The last thing we need is 'cheaping out' on a non-solution that compounds the looming transport failure in south-east Queensland.  It is time the LNP got behind Cross River Rail and demonstrated that they actually understand what is required for the future (1)."

Reference:

1.  22 Jan 2012: SEQ: Cross River Rail bipartisan support is the way forward http://railbotforum.org/mbs/index.php?topic=7523.0


Contact:

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

[mufreight]

It seems Campbell might be at risk of not getting elected but LNP is unlikely to loose. Advantage for the new Premier if not Campbell is that they can take a bet each way. LNP is unlikely to nominate the alt leader until the election result and new Premier can therefore keep their mouth shut on policy and once in the chair go with what ever option fits all the criteria best.

Now that to is a real cause for concern   

[Cam]

Will CRR be subject to regular track/signal/power faults like the rest of the SEQ network is?

[SurfRail]

Will CRR be subject to regular track/signal/power faults like the rest of the SEQ network is?

I doubt it for a number of reasons:

1. The greater sectorisation possible once CRR is finished will mitigate big network-wide problems like pigeons getting fried in current single-point-of-failure locations.  Once CRR and Clapham are in place, there will be NO single point of failure anywhere because there will be no point of the network where absolutely all lines intersect using the same corridor, and Mayne will not longer be the only significant train stabling depot.

2. CRR will be new infrastructure and so is likely to be less maintenance heavy due to better design and the fact it is new stuff.

3. CRR will mainly be underground, so it removes a very large amount of the risk of thinks like lightning strikes, bird strikes etc having a direct impact on the corridor.  There are of course possible issues which can still happen (eg if the fire protection systems at the Gabba get triggered accidentally - this even happened at Toowong when one of the suburban steam services was running a year or so ago), but the likelihood of several things going wrong for both CRR and the other 2 sectors is minimal.

[ozbob]

Sent to all outlets:

15th March 2012

Cross River Rail and the LNP

Greetings,

It is time the LNP outlined what they intend to do with respect to Cross River Rail.  Support this essential project or not.

If not what are they going to do?

The voters of Queensland want to know, now!

Best wishes
Robert

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

[Stillwater]

Beware the LNP releasing its CRR solution and funding for it at the same time as the flood inquiry report is made public - the hope being that the voters will concentrate on the flood aftermath and recommendations and not some half-baked transport plan.  The media would also put reporting of the flood inquiry findings above other stories.

If the LNP plan is the Cleveland Solution, or variation, the party needs to address some of the criticism in this forum about conflict with the Kurilpa Bridge etc. 

[Golliwog]

It could crop up the debate tonight?

[Gazza]

Why is the kurlipa bridge considered such a dealbreaker? It's not on the aerial image, but at the same time, I don't see why the line wouldn't just go under it.

Not that I'm supporting the Cleveland solution.

[Stillwater]

In the debate, Campbell Newman says his priority in transport is rail, but again no details.  About a week ago he said that his solution to CRR congestion would be announced 'within days'.  Will we be handed the glossy brochure as we file outside the polling booth?

[somebody]

It could crop up the debate tonight?

Saw him spruik buying lots of buses at one point. 

Paid for by the state.  Hmmm.

Persisting with his refusal to answer what if the LNP gets in but he doesn't.

Go Kate!

[Golliwog]

That really did appear to be the crowds main concern. What was most telling for me though was when asked about leadership capabilities of LNP politicians, he could only name candidates trying to get in. He wouldn't/couldn't name one sitting LNP member.

[Mr X]

He couldn't even name his deputy? 

[#Metro]

In the debate, Campbell Newman says his priority in transport is rail, but again no details.  About a week ago he said that his solution to CRR congestion would be announced 'within days'.  Will we be handed the glossy brochure as we file outside the polling booth?

[Stillwater]

In the absence of any statement to the contrary, we must assume that Cross River rail, as outlined and agreed with Infrastructure Australia, is dead should a LNP government gets elected, which the polls tell us seems likely.

This report best describes the LNP position.  It remains the LNP position until a new position is revealed:

The Liberal National Party has signalled it will go to the next state election without a clear decision on Brisbane's $8 billion (now $6.3 billion) cross-river rail project.

Although the party has proposed stop-gap measures to upgrade the South Brisbane and South Bank railway stations, it is undecided on the cross-river underground rail project planned by the government.

Mr Newman initially backed cross-river rail in July 2010, then in March called for it to be scrapped and replaced with an inner-city subway system, linked to busways.

An LNP government would set up an expert committee after the state election to provide advice on the best "value for money" options to deal with passenger needs.

"This assessment would include the existing cross-river rail proposal as well as examining alternatives," the document says.

"Those alternatives could include developing integrated networks that adapt various modes of transport such as greater use of light rail and the establishment of rail lines independent of the 'core' line."

Fearing a backlash should he dismiss the CRR proposal as it stands, Campbell Newman will, over the next week, adopt an equivocal position of referring the matter to a committee 'together with other proposals' as yet undefined.  One of these is railway lines independent of the 'core line'.

As vague as it is, that's what we have got as the LNP transport policy.

[#Metro]

"Those alternatives could include developing integrated networks that adapt various modes of transport such as greater use of light rail and the establishment of rail lines independent of the 'core' line."

Someone has been reading the Cleveland Solution. Heaven help us all.

I suspect that terminate and transfer will be used and it could well be possibly a busway conversion to LRT (not worth it capacity wise) and terminating at South Brisbane with the extra platform to allow pax to transfer over. Nothing surprises me!!

[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]

From the Couriermail 17th March 2012 page 12

Big-ticket vows stuck at station



Article online --> here!

[Dean Quick]

For the past few years little mister big has pushed/promoted and spent millions on road tunnels and tollways that have become white elephants. The few half baked pathetically inadequate transport announcements that he has announced confirms that the LNP remain embedded in the past and have no answers for a sustainable transport future.

Registrations frozen---PATHETIC !!

Cleveland solution-----PATHETIC !!

[Mr X]

KAP to spend CRR funds on Bruce Highway = TERRIBLE

[Stillwater]

There are no funds for CRR yet, from state or federal sources.  If funding is approved, it will be tied to CRR and not available for reallocation without being forfeited.

[somebody]

There are no funds for CRR yet, from state or federal sources.  If funding is approved, it will be tied to CRR and not available for reallocation without being forfeited.

Don't we already know that?  It's not about actually implementing it, it's about scoring points to win rural seats.

[Fares_Fair]

KAP to spend CRR funds on Bruce Highway = TERRIBLE

Realistically KAP will never form government, nor even hold the balance of power.
They will go the way of One Nation.
They don't even know what CRR is, and are totally confused and then to say that they will put it ($8 billion - old price too) into regional and rural roads beggars belief.
Qlders are over minority governments, seen federally and at state level in past years.

[SteelPan]

Whilst I too would have liked Newman to publicly support CRR more strongly, attacking him for not could be seen as a little unjust.

Consider,

1) what has the current State Govt given us regards the CRR project so far - a theoretical proposal, they have not themselves absolutely committed to it.

2) they have indeed already used the floods to extend out the theoretical project timeline.

3) the feds have not yet come to the party regards any level of funding.

4) and given the above, Newman is supposed to give an absolute commitment to what exactly - a non committed, unfunded theory?

just sayin... I mean for how long have govts of all political colours told the people of SE Qld a rail line to Redcliffe was a "must have"!  Newman just may in fact, be treating people with a bit more respect and just telling them the truth, CRR is a future possibility - if/when the feds cough up some real dollars and until that happens, why try to con people in to believing otherwise?   :conf

[ozbob]

Cross River Rail has had around 5 years of exhaustive work up.  IA has given the final approval.  Of course it is a funding issue, but unless there is bipartisan support the project is dead, funding will go to Melbourne and Sydney, as the new Governments (Liberal) in Vic and NSW carried on the momentum of the previous Labor initiatives.

The point is what is the alternative?  A couple of platforms at South Brisbane.   Goodness sakes, we have a major transport crisis looming and they are still tap dancing.

Newman has always supported CRR, until he became LNP leader.  This is the reality and exposes the real position.

[somebody]

Have IA announced that they will fund it, and to what tune yet?  I thought we were still waiting for that.