Terms of use Privacy About us Media Contact

Poll

Do you think there should be dedicated Minister for Public and Active Transport in the new cabinet?

Yes
12 (80%)
No
3 (20%)
Other - please explain
0 (0%)

Total Members Voted: 10

Voting closed: March 25, 2012, 04:24:43 PM

Author Topic: Do you think there should be dedicated Minister for Public and Active Transport?  (Read 3523 times)

Offline ozbob

  • Administrator
  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 99640
    • RAIL Back On Track
NSW, South Australia,  and Victoria for example have a Minister for Public Transport.  Having a dedicated Minister gives a champion for public and active transport, not conflicted by other transport issues.  Is it time Queensland moved in this direction?
Half baked projects, have long term consequences ...
Ozbob's Gallery Forum   Facebook  Twitter

Offline #Metro

  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 20697
http://www.cabinet.qld.gov.au/ministers.html

Don't we have this setup already? Craig Wallace MP on Roads and Annastacia on PT...?
Negative people... have a problem for every solution.
Posts are commentary and are not necessarily endorsed by RAIL Back on Track or its members. Not affiliated with, paid by or in conspiracy with MTR/Metro.

Offline ozbob

  • Administrator
  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 99640
    • RAIL Back On Track
http://www.cabinet.qld.gov.au/ministers.html

Don't we have this setup already? Craig Wallace MP on Roads and Annastacia on PT...?

No, the present Minister for Transport has a lot do with road transport eg. car licencing, registration, trucks and so forth.  Craig Wallace is handling road infrastructure and busways ..
Half baked projects, have long term consequences ...
Ozbob's Gallery Forum   Facebook  Twitter

somebody

  • Guest
Hmm, I remember Ms Palas... being interviewed on 612 and couldn't take questions regarding road tolls.

Other jurisdictions do have Transport including PT & roads as one agency/Minister responsible.

Offline Stillwater

  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 6547
If the LNP gets in by a landslide, there will be a large number of hopefuls looking for a ministerial portfolio.  Premier Newman would also need to have regard for the internal vying among Nats and Libs.  That would seem to suggest fewer super departments and more 'single issue' ministers.  For example, we now have one minister for police and emergency services (SES, police, ambulance), as well as prisons.  Prisons could be hived off to a single minister and there could be a minister for police and emergency services.  Not out of the ordinary to have a minister for public and active transport, but that person would need to have close liaison with the minister for main roads, for instance, who would be in charge of building roads with bus lanes and bicycle paths.  Also possible to have Level 1 Minister (Transport and Main Roads) assisted by junior ministers or Parliamentary Secretaries for parts of that portfolio (road safety, etc).  Would Translink stand as a separate unit, or would it brought back within the departmental structure?

Offline Golliwog

  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5043
I actually think it should be the other way. It should just be the Transport Minister, which would cover, PT, Roads, busways, licences, basically everything currently split between the Roads Minister and the Transport Minister. One department, one minister.
There is no silver bullet… but there is silver buckshot.
Never argue with an idiot. They'll drag you down to their level and beat you with experience.

Offline HappyTrainGuy

  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5076
Anything to do with adding more random people for paid positions to agree to studies gets my vote.  ???

Offline SurfRail

  • Global Moderator
  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 8277
We should have a Department for Planning and Infrastructure, which should cover all transport, planning and related issues.  It does not make sense to me that these people are all in different buildings!

Massively cut down the size of the Main Roads component so it no longer competes with the "T" in "TMR", then bring over the planning people and related offices.
Ride the G:

Offline Jonno

  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2049
I actually think it should be the other way. It should just be the Transport Minister, which would cover, PT, Roads, busways, licences, basically everything currently split between the Roads Minister and the Transport Minister. One department, one minister.

+1 .  A good transport Minister who is across the leading practices in the industry would be prioritizing freight rail and public/active transport and not having to argue against Main Roads!!!

But I am a dreamer remember!!!
« Last Edit: March 19, 2012, 11:57:08 AM by Jonno »

Offline Golliwog

  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5043
We should have a Department for Planning and Infrastructure, which should cover all transport, planning and related issues.  It does not make sense to me that these people are all in different buildings!

Massively cut down the size of the Main Roads component so it no longer competes with the "T" in "TMR", then bring over the planning people and related offices.
Actually I like this idea as well. Though that would be a 'super' department, and I doubt Bligh would make any more changes given what she is planning with Health if she comes back, and Newman has said he doesn't like the 'super' departments and is going to at least split up DEEDI (or whatever it's called now)
There is no silver bullet… but there is silver buckshot.
Never argue with an idiot. They'll drag you down to their level and beat you with experience.

Offline SurfRail

  • Global Moderator
  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 8277
We should have a Department for Planning and Infrastructure, which should cover all transport, planning and related issues.  It does not make sense to me that these people are all in different buildings!

Massively cut down the size of the Main Roads component so it no longer competes with the "T" in "TMR", then bring over the planning people and related offices.
Actually I like this idea as well. Though that would be a 'super' department, and I doubt Bligh would make any more changes given what she is planning with Health if she comes back, and Newman has said he doesn't like the 'super' departments and is going to at least split up DEEDI (or whatever it's called now)

I take the point, but frankly most of the problems we see are resulting from land use and transport not being integrated properly.  By actually having one minister responsible for that entire process (instead of the Bligh system which would give that department about 3 or 4 ministers), instead of being responsible for transport in a vacuum, we might start getting somewhere.
Ride the G:

Offline ozbob

  • Administrator
  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 99640
    • RAIL Back On Track
Twitter

Daniel Bowen ‏ @danielbowen

@Robert_Dow Note Vic PT minister is also Roads.
Half baked projects, have long term consequences ...
Ozbob's Gallery Forum   Facebook  Twitter

Offline Fares_Fair

  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5043
  • Duplicate the Sunshine Coast Line (#2tracks)
For SEQ and longdistance rail/bus and air yes seperate. Minister for PT

The Minister for transport should look after Roads and Freight rail.

Question, why separate freight rail from general rail?
« Last Edit: March 23, 2012, 06:31:54 PM by Fares_Fair »
Regards,
Fares_Fair


Offline Stillwater

  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 6547
Minister for Rail Freight Logistics, Passenger and Active Transport  :-t

 

Sitemap 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 


“You can't understand a city without using its public transportation system.” -- Erol Ozan