Cross River Rail Project

[ozbob]

I understand your point but RTT was suggesting it had poor coverage.  It had excellent coverage, a lot more than many so called hot issues.

The general public is now across CRR as evidenced by commentary everywhere.

[curator49]

I do believe that there is only one Airport train that stops at Loganlea during peak at 7:01 am

Anyway, whatever the situation, I understand that there is support for CRR or a variation that achieves a similar outcome. I won't even argue about whether or not trains can be successfully turned back from South Brisbane, I just think the expense for what, hopefully, would be a temporary measure while CRR or a CRR amended is built.

The trouble is that the current CRR project has gone through all the hoops and is identified by IA as "Ready to Proceed".

If (and it might be a big if) the Feds come up with the $4 billion or so that the State has asked for, I would hope that the LNP Government will see their way clear to progress the project. It will still be about 2015 before they turn the first sod. In time for the next election. 

[SteelPan]

.....If (and it might be a big if) the Feds come up with the $4 billion or so that the State has asked for, I would hope that the LNP Government will see their way clear to progress the project. It will still be about 2015 before they turn the first sod. In time for the next election. 

I have no doubt, if the Fed's came good with around 50% of the now projected cost of CRR, Newman would grab it with both hands.

To be honest, as each day passes, I'm more impressed with how Newman has handled the issue of CRR, he can now move forward on the issue, from the perspective that only a govt can, as opposed to, in essence, signing blank cheques, by making pledges from outside of actual govt.

[curator49]

Yes, I agree SteelPan.

He has not appeared to be as dogmatic as coming out saying "he is against it" and appears to be leaving the door open.

With any project he would be foolish to accept totally what has been planned by the previous Government. Rather he has underaken to "review the CRR project" which I think is a good stance to tank.

[Jonno]

Yes, I agree SteelPan.

He has not appeared to be as dogmatic as coming out saying "he is against it" and appears to be leaving the door open.

With any project he would be foolish to accept totally what has been planned by the previous Government. Rather he has underaken to "review the CRR project" which I think is a good stance to tank.

Tank you very much :-)

[Stillwater]

An interesting situation

Several circumstances, none of them directly related, have come together to make for interesting times for public transport in SEQ.

The first is the ascendency of Campbell Newman to the premiership and his announcement late in the election campaign that the LNP had no 'special policy' for relieving rail congestion across the Brisbane River.  This announcement kept CRR, as envisaged, in play.  Mr Newman could claim that LNP pressure forced a re-examination of the project cost, bringing it down to $6.3 billion.  If, after receiving a detailed briefing and casting an engineer's eye over its blueprints, he could say the LNP can built it 'better and cheaper', even if what's happened is that the contingency built into a large project has been brought down as the project detail has been ironed out.  CRR still requires a federal government financial commitment.

Secondly, a stoush is occurring between the federal and NSW governments over a $2 billion allocation from the feds to the Parramatta-Epping railway line.  With the election of the Farrell government south of the Tweed,  Mr Farrell wants to switch the money to one of his election promises, the North-West railway line.  The stalemate continues and $2 billion dollars sits waiting to be spent.  If the federal government grew tired and wanted to prove that national transport infrastructure funds are not state grants, but project-specific allocations, it could withdraw its $2 billion and send it north of the border for CRR.

The magnitude of the ALP's defeat at state level requires Labor to regain traction and visibility in Queensland.  Federally, the majority ALP government has eight of 30 seats in Queensland.  It needs to keep them all if it is to retain government and must find strategies to attract votes.

What better way than backing CRR, which has benefits for most electorates in which it did badly on Saturday?  A federal contribution confirmed in the May budget would allow work to start on this 'ready to proceed' project, with lots of construction activity occurring in 18 months, when a federal election is due.  The construction sector is at a low ebb, so competitive tendering could be expected.

Next we have the election of Anna Palaszczuk as Opposition Leader.  As a former Transport Minister, she will be able to take the fight up to the new government on transport issues.  Here insistence that she was running a 'world class' transport operation may make it hard for her to claim that the LNP now is running a poor service.

Finally, we have a series of very interesting public service appointments, starting with Neil Scales, from Merseylink, to the job as CEO of Translink.  Understandably, Mr Scales has been keeping his head down while the political salvos have fired overhead.  He will emerge soon to apply his experience to that organisation.  He will implement the new fare structure the LNP has promised and could be charged with a state takeover of the BCC bus fleet.

Then we have the appointment of one-time Queensland Liberal party president, Michael Caltabiano, as the new director-general of Transport and Main Roads.  Not only does he have an understanding of transport within a political context, he has the smarts professionally.  Caltabiano studied engineering at James Cook University and a Master of Philosophy at Nottingham University (UK) and completed a Graduate Diploma of Business at Queensland University of Technology. He worked as a civil engineer and company director.

Jon Grayson, a Brisbane-based investment banker who previously worked in Queensland Treasury on government asset sales, is now the state's most senior public servant.  The new director-general of the Premier's Department, Mr Grayson brings to that post his experience as principal of Queensland Infrastructure Partners.  He also led the successful bid for the Dalrymple Bay Coal Terminal.  He also spent two years as head of Prime Infrastructure, which became one of Australia's largest infrastructure funds.

Mr Newman has also appointed Barry Broe, who served under the former lord mayor as head of infrastructure in Brisbane City Council, as coordinator-general.

Across key public sector posts, Mr Newman is appointing skilled people with a background in transport infrastructure planning, financing and operations; also the bringing together of public and private partnerships in the provision of new infrastructure.  Watch this space.

Also worthy of note is that the new departmental heads Mr Newman has announced are beholden to the Premier for their jobs, not the ministers they will serve.  Can we envisage a Premier contacting department heads (people he has worked with beforehand) and firing off orders rather than working through ministers?

[somebody]

Not sure if Anna Palaszczuk did in fact insist that PT was world class.  I think that was more Anna Bligh.

[ozbob]

Yes, the concern about  someone who is a strong political player being appointed as DG Main Roads and Transport was discussed on 612 ABC Radio this morning.

Who is the Minister in effect?  Fair question?

I wonder what the new to be Transport Minister thinks about this??  Hopefully the interview with Professor Scott Prasser ACU might be up on the blog later today.  

[Arnz]

Not sure if Anna Palaszczuk did in fact insist that PT was world class.  I think that was more Anna Bligh.

Her last media releases that have the "World Clarse" phrase within them, I think the major train network meltdown which led to the fare free day had her mentioning that maintenance was "World Clarse".

[somebody]

I think the major train network meltdown which led to the fare free day had her mentioning that maintenance was "World Clarse".

Surely not.

Searching Ministerial Statements for the phrase reveals 6 instances.  Taxi system was described as World Class !.  As were busways, but all other occurrences were prefixed by "building".

[colinw]

While the Caltabiano appointment has led to accusations of "jobs for the boys", I am of the opinion that he is actually eminently well qualified for the position.

Question is whether it will be "roads, roads, roads" ...?

[Golliwog]

While the Caltabiano appointment has led to accusations of "jobs for the boys", I am of the opinion that he is actually eminently well qualified for the position.

Question is whether it will be "roads, roads, roads" ...?

Newman said Caltabiano was tasked with getting business cases made/updated and submitted to the Fed's for Bruce+Warrego highways, and the Toowoomba Range upgrade/bypass/whatever it is.

[ozbob]

Yes, the concern about  someone who is a strong political player being appointed as DG Main Roads and Transport was discussed on 612 ABC Radio this morning.

Who is the Minister in effect?  Fair question?

I wonder what the new to be Transport Minister thinks about this??  Hopefully the interview with Professor Scott Prasser ACU might be up on the blog later today.  

Interview is --> here!

[SurfRail]

Not sure if Anna Palaszczuk did in fact insist that PT was world class.

She did, at least during PTAG meetings.

[Jonno]

Road-blinkers on! Check! Ear plugs in!  Check!  Ready!  Bigger roads reduce congestion and are safer! Bigger roads reduce congestion and are safer! Bigger roads reduce congestion and are safer!  

[Mozz]

It's now the cusp of day four... waiting for day five (Friday) to find out how the Government departments are configured.

We currently have 13 departments.... there has in the past been up to 27 from memory in the history of Queensland.......

The push for less departments over the past 10 years was part of the government of the day's desire to have a more efficient public sector (saving money), particularly a reduction in terms of those people supporting front line staff, in these terms it was generally successful. (I would suggest that if the number of departments went from 13 to 18 or 22 or 26 then it will have a cost in the hundreds of millions maybe more....) The london school of economics has been party to a range of research into this area including this:

http://www2.lse.ac.uk/newsAndMedia/news/archives/2010/05/whitehall.aspx

The incoming government has telegraphed a significant change in the structure and direction of the queensland public sector which will apparently be announced on Friday...

I would suggest that publicly announcing the appointments of people (regardless of their qualifications, political flavour) to the most senior roles in the public sector, prior to the decision of what the public sector will look like, and prior to the decision of which Minister will be responsible for which department is maybe not the most considered action of an incoming government.... what can't wait a few days at this point in time..... 

[Derwan]

It's now the cusp of day four... waiting for day five (Friday) to find out how the Government departments are configured.

They published the interim set-up 2 days after the election:

http://www.qld.gov.au/about/how-government-works/structure-changes/

It's basically the same as the previous one - so obviously we're still waiting for the "new world".  The biggest thing will be whether they go back to single-minister, single-department.  As Mozz mentioned, this would undo all the savings made by joining the departments - and/or create a ridiculous amount of work for the non-frontline staff that the government is attacking.  (There is currently a freeze on appointing any non-frontline staff in the Queensland Public Service.)

It would be more logical to have a minister responsible for a particular area/service of a department rather than bits and pieces of different departments (which is how it's set up now).

Of course, a logical government is an oxymoron.

[awotam]

I've just been clearing out my junk mail from the few weeks pre-election and noticed an LNP leaflet "It's time for a change"... "It's time to Get Queensland Back on Track". Can't remember exactly when this one arrived but I'm thinking possibly 3 weeks before polling day. Inside is listed "Our Team's Plans to get Queensland Back on Track". Under Public Transport, with Scott Emerson listed as the potential Minister, one of their "Plans to get... etc" is;
The LNP will address Labor's failure to fix Cross River Rail as it is critical to public transport throughout SEQ and we are committed to delivering public transport that works for commuters by delivering a reliable, frequent and safe network
(bold as per original in leaflet)
In the 3 weeks or so that followed, we all know that CRR went from being critical to public transport throughout SEQ, to being swept conveniently aside, if not completely under the carpet. I guess that "address Labor's failure to fix CRR" doesn't necessarily mean that they are going to deliver exactly (or even close to) the same solution. However I'm curious to see how long this commitment to delivering a reliable, frequent and safe network will last.

[somebody]

While the Caltabiano appointment has led to accusations of "jobs for the boys", I am of the opinion that he is actually eminently well qualified for the position.

Question is whether it will be "roads, roads, roads" ...?

I'm strongly inclined to differ.  I didn't see anything in his resume which indicated experience as a "manager of managers" on anything like this scale.

Don't car if there are "jobs for the boys/girls". thats how private industry works, head hunt these senior and key roles, rarely advertise. When you recruit a CEO for Translink etc, they dont' turn up with CV in hand waiting in the corriodor for the HR Manager to finish picker their nose. They go to the prospective person's home city and take them out to dinner and sell why Translink needs them.

Only concern is that the boy/girl choosen is the best person for the job!

It appears that is not a consideration with some of the recent appointments.  When it happens in the private sector the hiring manager has staked a lot of their reputation on their performance.  Problem here is that won't be reviewed for 3 years and 6 years or so in practice.

[SurfRail]

I am disappointed about the rhetoric on getting rid of jobs for the boys, and then appointing several prominent LNP figures within a week of being elected.

I don't really care how qualified they are - I doubt they are the "best" qualified, and the mere appearance of favouritism is much too high for this to be seen as a move for accountability and open government.

I suspect he just (already) doesn't think he answers to anybody.

[Stillwater]

The majority that the LNP has won means it will be in power for two terms (six years) and maybe a third.

[O_128]

I am disappointed about the rhetoric on getting rid of jobs for the boys, and then appointing several prominent LNP figures within a week of being elected.

I don't really care how qualified they are - I doubt they are the "best" qualified, and the mere appearance of favouritism is much too high for this to be seen as a move for accountability and open government.

I suspect he just (already) doesn't think he answers to anybody.

I get what you mean but these types of jobs are never advertised, Its the way things go.

[somebody]

The majority that the LNP has won means it will be in power for two terms (six years) and maybe a third.

I don't get the third term?  I'm sure next election will see a return to a decent size Labor opposition.

[Arnz]

The majority that the LNP has won means it will be in power for two terms (six years) and maybe a third.

I don't get the third term?  I'm sure next election will see a return to a decent size Labor opposition.

I don't think they'll get a decent sized opposition at the next election.  It would take time, but I would think they would at least be a considerable challenger in 6 years.

But no doubt at the next state election, ALP will at least grab a few seats here and there to at least from 7-8 seats to 12-15 seats.  It was the same with the Nationals when they went from only 11 seats in 2001 to 15 or so seats in 2004.

Newman's team may make mistakes, but I can't see them stuffing up this badly in 3 years where it ends up losing plenty of seats.

[Mr X]

The majority that the LNP has won means it will be in power for two terms (six years) and maybe a third.

I think they're in for at least two terms but they can expect to lose a lot of seats at the next election, purely because a lot of safe Labor seats were won by them on anti-Labor protest votes, rather than an explicit desire for the LNP. I expect quite a few one term LNP wonders.
Labor can easily bounce back to 20 seats by 2015 and up to 30 or 40 by 2018.

[ozbob]

Yes Mr X.

There will no doubt be a local 'pork-barrel' frenzy by these new LNP local members in an attempt to cement themselves into the seats too.  The worst aspects of the Oz electoral system on show for all.

Whether the big picture stuff can get past the 'pork-barrel' frenzy is a moot point?

[O_128]

Newman has said he will speak to other parties about 4 year terms, most likely to commence after the next election, 4 year terms offer a lot more stability.

[somebody]

If they only get to 20 seats in 2015 it may be challenging to get back in 2018.

Newman has said he will speak to other parties about 4 year terms, most likely to commence after the next election, 4 year terms offer a lot more stability.

That would require a referendum wouldn't it?

[Mr X]

I wouldn't think so. Depends how good a job (or not) Newman does as premier.

[Stillwater]

It would not require referendum - just let it be known at the election at the end of a three-year term that punters will be voting for a government over four years.  (Legislation would need to be amended for this.)  The government could not, while in the middle of a three-year term, say they would extend that particular term to four years.

[Mozz]

I am disappointed about the rhetoric on getting rid of jobs for the boys, and then appointing several prominent LNP figures within a week of being elected.

I don't really care how qualified they are - I doubt they are the "best" qualified, and the mere appearance of favouritism is much too high for this to be seen as a move for accountability and open government.

I suspect he just (already) doesn't think he answers to anybody.

I get what you mean but these types of jobs are never advertised, Its the way things go.

Director-General jobs were advertised and recruited to using merit based selection processes under the former Queensland Government.

From time to time some were moved around to different portfolios.

DG roles were widely advertised, selection panels arranged, shortlisting conducted, interviews held, referees checked, recommendation/s for appointment were made.

This used to occur under the auspices of the Public Service Commission.

http://www.psc.qld.gov.au

[somebody]

^ My understanding is that this did not occur in all cases of SES positions e.g. Greg Withers.

I doubt it applied in all cases of DG positions also, e.g. John Bradley @DERM and then @Premier's

[Mozz]

Perhaps the DG of the Premiers Department may be different, can't recall if it had been advertised.

My experience in the public sector tells me that all SES positions are subject to merit based selection including the first role you mentioned.

The speculation around that poor gentlemen's role as to how he got his position, how he performed in this role and when and how his employment contract has been dealt with (including published media speculation that his "contract" was extended 5 years by the Premier just prior to the election day) has been the subject of much hysteria... akin I would suggest to that around President Obama and the "birther" movement http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Barack_Obama_citizenship_conspiracy_theories

[somebody]

"poor gentleman" - I hope you aren't referring to Mr Withers who is neither IMO.

His background was as an economist yet he was working in Envirmental Science at a high salary.  Does more need to be said?

[ozbob]

From the Couriermail click here!

Brisbane Cross River Rail's future hangs by thread

Brisbane Cross River Rail's future hangs by thread

    by: Robert MacDonald
    From: The Courier-Mail
    April 02, 2012 12:00AM

IF YOU'VE ever wondered how governments can spend tens of millions of dollars and end up with nothing to show for it, the Cross River Rail project could be a perfect case to study.

This was Anna Bligh's grand plan to solve Brisbane's growing rail congestion problem - an 18km-long, mainly underground line linking northern and southern suburbs via an under-river, mid-city tunnel.

It has so far involved close to five years of studies, plans, environmental impact assessments, extensive public consultation and possibly more than $40 million of state and federal money.

Lots of people think it's a good idea, most importantly the Federal Government's Infrastructure Australia, which assesses big public infrastructure projects for possible Commonwealth funding support.

Just weeks before the recent election, it announced it had taken an "in principle decision" to rank the scheme, currently costed at $6.4 billion, as "ready to proceed".

A tick from Infrastructure Australia doesn't guarantee Commonwealth financial backing but does indicate the experts believe the project is in the national interest.

Despite this endorsement, the Cross River Rail project could soon be effectively dead in the water, or at best, postponed indefinitely - the victim of a combination of raw politics and lack of money.

Virtually from the moment Bligh unveiled the scheme in 2009 in response to studies saying the city's only existing cross-river rail link, the Merivale Bridge, would be choked by 2016, it became a potent point of political difference between the major parties.

For Bligh, it was the embodiment of her government's self-declared ability to be visionary and to plan for the future. For the Opposition, it was just another unfunded pipedream tossed up by a government desperate to be seen to be doing something to solve a problem it should have seen coming years earlier.

But pipedream or not, the Bligh government committed extensive resources to the proposal.

It appears to have spent more than $20 million for the pre-feasibility work and then the detailed planning and public consultation necessary to get it to a standard acceptable for Infrastructure Australia's consideration.

It also put aside money to begin property acquisitions and convinced the Federal Government to tip in $20 million to help cover early pre-development costs.

And during it all, the LNP cast aspersions from the sidelines.

Its case, that this was all an expensive game of bluff, was strengthened by the government's decision to push the project back by at least a couple of years after last January's floods and then its failure to win initial support from Infrastructure Australia, which last year said more work needed to be done.

But now Infrastructure Australia appears satisfied and, in June, is expected to confirm its initial recommendation that the Cross River Rail project is deserving of Commonwealth support.

We will then have to wait to see if Treasurer Wayne Swan, desperate to produce a balanced budget by next year, decides to hand over the $4 billion sought in the Bligh government's submission to help pay for the $5.3 billion first stage of the project.

We also have to wait and see how Campbell Newman's Government responds.

In opposition, it promised to immediately upgrade the South Bank and South Brisbane railway stations to provide extra platform capacity and "operational flexibility", which it claimed would extend five years to the Merivale Bridge's usefulness.

But what we don't yet know is how Campbell Newman might handle the Cross River Rail proposal, now the LNP is in office and now all the heavy lifting has been done.

The view from the Government benches is always different, but different enough to suddenly embrace Anna Bligh's "pipedream"?

The new Government hasn't canned the project but we'll have to wait to find out whether all the millions of dollars of time and effort so far invested yield something more than yet another grand vision that failed, either for want of money or political will.

[ozbob]

Media release 3 April 2012

SEQ: Cross River Rail - A tunnel, for trains

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 again highlights the importance of Cross River Rail (1, 2).

Robert Dow, Spokesman for RAIL Back On Track said:

"Cross River Rail is one of the state's largest and most important state-building projects. The name of the project is perhaps unfortunate as it merely suggests that the project will cross the Brisbane River and is rail. It is so much more than this - the benefits of this project are wide and dispersed across South East Queensland, reaching as far away as Beenleigh, Yarrabilba, Cleveland, Nambour and the Gold Coast for example. It enables rail to become the backbone of the public transport network with the ability to carry large number of passengers."

"By way of analogy, sending cars all to the city on the road system in peak hour will result in congestion as cars queue and get in the way of each other. A similar situation occurs on the rail system - sending trains all to the city on the train system in peak hour will also result in congestion as trains wait to cross the Merivale Bridge into the CBD from the south, and as trains from all lines converge on the core CBD section. The number of additional 'slots' available for trains on this restricted section will exhaust in 2016."

"Around this time, and if nothing is done, our members expect to see trains leaving people behind and a worsening of car congestion on the roads. The bus system already has capacity issues. No government wants to go down in history for deliberately bringing about an avoidable situation like that - just look at Melbourne, Perth or Sydney for examples of transport issues deciding election outcomes."

"At around $6 billion dollars Cross River Rail is costly, but so is lost business productivity and congestion. The benefits of this project also exceed the costs of the project. Multi-billion dollar car tunnels are also costly, both to construct and also to drive through. Indeed they are the highest toll, highest pollution, lowest capacity solution to deal with transport and urban mobility problems, and yet this hasn't prevented them being constructed."

"Cross River Rail decentralises the central part of the rail network, which means increased capacity and reliability. Currently, if there is an incident between Roma Street, Central, Brunswick Street or Bowen Hills, the entire network is plunged into chaos as all trains must currently travel through this 'core' section. Cross River Rail will provide an alternate core rail route through the CBD and give some much needed redundancy to this critical part of the network."

"RAIL Back On Track is confident that Cross River Rail will be seen for the opportunity that it is - a chance for a state to take on a large, important state-building project and important piece of infrastructure, and a chance for government to get it right. Indeed the construction of the Merivale Bridge and electrification of the QR train system are projects that Queenslanders can be proud of. Cross River Rail will allow future generations to come into the Brisbane CBD from the suburbs and afar for work, study and play, rather than sit in congestion on the roads.

"Cross River Rail - think of it as TransApex (3), for trains!"

References:

1. http://www.crossriverrail.qld.gov.au/

2. Brisbane Cross River Rail's future hangs by thread http://www.couriermail.com.au/news/queensland/rail-fixs-future-hangs-by-thread/comments-fnbwr276-1226315918783

3. TransApex is the car toll tunnel bypass system purported to relieve congestion on roads.  http://www.brisbane.qld.gov.au/traffic-transport/roads-infrastructure-bikeways/tunnels-bridges-major-roads/TransApex/index.htm

Contact:

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

[#Metro]

With only 32 general traffic lanes across the Brisbane River, all of which are nearly at capacity during peak hour, the need to fix the fundamental flaws in our road network has become critical.

http://www.brisbane.qld.gov.au/traffic-transport/roads-infrastructure-bikeways/tunnels-bridges-major-roads/TransApex/index.htm

Cross River Rail = 30 motorway lanes of capacity.... puts the roads into perspective, doesn't it?

[achiruel]

With only 32 general traffic lanes across the Brisbane River, all of which are nearly at capacity during peak hour, the need to fix the fundamental flaws in our road network has become critical.

There's now 42 lanes.  How many more do we realistically need?  And still we only have 6 rail lines (and only 2 for Beenleigh, Cleveland & Gold Coast lines combined, plus whatever else they plan to hang of the Beenleigh line (Flagstone).

12 - Sir Leo Hielscher Bridges
6 - Story Bridge
4 - CLEM7
8 - Captain Cook Bridge
2 - Victoria Bridge
4 - Go Between Bridge
4 - William Jolly Bridge
2 - Walter Taylor Bridge

[somebody]

Sydney's lanes:
4 - Harbour Tunnel
8 - Harbour Bridge, one of which is a 24 hour bus lane
7 - Gladesville Bridge
6 - Concord Rd Bridges
4 - Silverwater Rd

East of James Ruse Dr (Parramatta) that's 28 general traffic lanes in 25km (as the crow flies) between Rosehill and the heads.

[SurfRail]

Sydney's lanes:
4 - Harbour Tunnel
8 - Harbour Bridge, one of which is a 24 hour bus lane
7 - Gladesville Bridge
6 - Concord Rd Bridges
4 - Silverwater Rd

East of James Ruse Dr (Parramatta) that's 28 general traffic lanes in 25km (as the crow flies) between Rosehill and the heads.

Does the Mortlake ferry count?