Independent commission of audit

[ozbob]

Brisbanetimes --> Energy assets safe, Newman says

[ozbob]

Couriermail --> Premier Campbell Newman outlines government response to Commission of Audit

[ozbob]

Queensland Parliament Hansard

http://www.parliament.qld.gov.au/documents/hansard/2013/2013_04_30_DAILY.pdf

Queensland Rail, Passenger Services

Ms TRAD: My question without notice is to the Premier. Given the government's acceptance of Peter Costello's recommendation to break up QR passenger services into separate franchise areas, will the Premier guarantee that the outsourcing and privatisation of Queensland Rail's passenger services will not lead to increased fares, a reduction in rail services and massive job losses?

Mr NEWMAN: I can guarantee a couple of things. Firstly I can guarantee that the public transport fare increase of 15 per cent for the current year we are in will not be happening—the Labor 15 per cent increase will not be happening. I can confirm that the other fare increase of 15 per cent that the current Leader of the Opposition put in place will not be happening as well. They will be halved. I can confirm that. I remind those opposite that they are the people who sold off the very profitable and lucrative bit of QR and left the stuff that did not make money—

Mr Seeney: And sold it rather cheaply.

Mr NEWMAN: They sold it rather cheaply, as we can probably see right now. What was said by the then transport minister in this House? As we heard from Minister McArdle earlier on, in this place a direct question was asked of the then Minister for Transport about whether QR would be sold off. That Minister for Transport said that it would not be sold off; it was not going to happen. Two days later, it was on the chopping block. There are a couple of things I need to draw out about that. Firstly, the people of Queensland did not know; they had been told there would be no asset sales. Secondly, the then cabinet of Premier Anna Bligh and Treasurer Andrew Fraser were not even told. Clearly the caucus was not told and then just told to suck it up.

Let us contrast that with our way of doing business. We have a very clear position that we will not be selling off assets without going to the people of Queensland. We have had our cabinet involved in a full discussion that provided a set of recommendations to our party room. The party room, a fine group of men and women, spent seven hours yesterday debating the issue and coming up with this endorsed response. What a breathtaking contrast that is with those hypocrites opposite.

In terms of the issue about passenger services on the South-East Queensland rail network, we are about competitive, efficient services. On the contestability issue, our position is that if the hardworking men and women in QR can do it as inexpensively on the public purse as can private sector operators, and there are many benchmarks interstate, it shall be done by them. At the end of the day, it is about the people of Queensland; it is about the commuters and the fares they have to pay. We are trying to keep those fares down. Those opposite just wanted to hit commuters with a 15 per cent increase, year after year. That is the difference.
(Time expired)
Social

[SurfRail]

It's rare I find myself agreeing with an answer to a question put on the floor of Parliament.

[nathandavid88]

Very much a "Shape up or ship out" mentality, which isn't necessarily a bad thing if it results in services being provided more efficiently.

[ozbob]

Statement:

OFFICE OF THE LEADER OF THE OPPOSITION

TUESDAY 30 APRIL 2013

Public Transport On The Auction Block After Costello

Passenger safety, fare prices and the reliability of public transport are up for grabs after the government agreed today to privatise passenger services on the city rail network.

Shadow Transport Minister Jackie Trad said the government had accepted the recommendation of former Howard Government Treasurer Peter Costello in his so-called "independent" audit that city passenger rail services and network infrastructure be "opened up for contestability".

"Queenslanders will hear the word "contestability" from the government over and over and over in the coming months," Ms Trad said.

"And just so no-one can be in doubt, it is the government's code word for privatisation and the Costello report in relation to public transport is about one thing only – sell, sell, sell.

"The Premier and his Treasurer can dress it any way they see fit but the simple truth is passenger services are now on the auction block.

"What that does is place fares at the mercy of a private operator.

"What that does is place passenger safety second as this government places the high standards currently enforced on our passenger network into the hands of a private operator.

"What that does is place the maintenance of our rail network into the hands of a private operator.

"And what that means is the tens of thousands of commuters who use the city network each day can no longer be assured they will be getting the very best."

Ms Trad said even though the government had committed to seeking a mandate from Queenslanders before selling assets, the sale of passenger services was inevitable.

"This government has no intention of consulting with the public.

"They already have form in this area, announcing earlier this month that they had sold off seven high rise buildings in the city – without mentioning it before they signed the deal.

"You can expect to see the same with rail services.

"The Premier and the Treasurer and the Transport Minister will sell them off, washing their hands of all responsibility for our train network and leaving passengers at the mercy of the highest bidder."

[SurfRail]

What drivel.

[nathandavid88]

My prediction for the next 12 months is that the use of the word "contestability" by the LNP will be directly proportional to the use of "privatisation" by the opposition. 

[#Metro]

What a load of crap from Ms Trad, as usual.

[Stillwater]

QUOTE: "Tens of thousands of commuters who use the city network each day can no longer be assured they will be getting the very best."

Ms Trad is under the illusion that Labor delivered a 'world clarse' rail network solution and it can't get better under private ownership.  Clearly Labor needs a few more years in the political wilderness.

[#Metro]

Where did all the $15 BN go from Bligh Privatisations go to? Increased hi frequency rail? Nope, went straight to paying debt off...

[ozbob]

From the Brisbane mX 30th April 2013 page 1

Rail up for sale

[HappyTrainGuy]

I wonder if the unions would try to block privatisation as much as they have been blocking DOO for the last 20 years

[#Metro]

In our media releases last year, we noticed that QR has been audited by the ICA but not BT.
In that media release, we questioned why and asked for the ICA to audit BT.
And now they have... and while not complete, it has likely lead to the spirit of the TransLink bus review being saved.

We need to continue to support the separation of BT from the BCC because that is central to everything.

It doesn't matter what BT does now, even if it does win the bus review, it will be a phyrric victory, because it will win the battle but ultimately lose the war and the bus contract, as it deserves to.

[ozbob]

Brisbanetimes --> 'Privatisation through the back door', says unions

[ozbob]

I wonder if the unions would try to block privatisation as much as they have been blocking DOO for the last 20 years

Probably, but in so doing they will quite possibly end any chance that Queensland Rail continuing as the operator.

Kennett moved because of widespread industrial action on a key weekend I recall.

I think they will make a lot of noise but having rallied against the TransLink bus review  they have put themselves in an awkward position of sorts, as have the Opposition and the Labor Councillors. 

The basket case that was the initial ' privatisation ' in Victoria would not be done in the same way here.  How could they be that stupid?

[ http://www.cpa.org.au/z-archive/g2008/1359rail.html ]

[#Metro]

Oh the horrors of Privatisation in Victoria. Trams every 8 minutes on most routes or better, 10 minute trains all weekend on lines across the network, Metro pushing hard to get even more frequency... Patronage explosion so high that the whole system needs massive upgrade, low fares, lower than in Queensland, buses running to train stations, no political Maroon CityGliders, SmartBus orbital routes...

Brisbane Transport has not increased the frequency of the Great Circle Line for 25 years. It is still half hourly, just like it was way back in 1988.

Can't Imagine what will happen when MTR Hong Kong Takes over QR!! Shudder the thought that TransPerth might put in a bid as well...

[ozbob]

I am referring to the ' Kennett 1999 model '  different operators for different lines effectively.  Collapsed in a shower of sh%t.

Operators like MTR and Yarra Trams are going well now.

[ozbob]

TransDevTSL has a foot hold with the Brisbane ferries.  Be interesting to see if TransDev would tender for BT bus operations ...

Any other locals?

Ventura could have a crack, certainly capable of pulling it off.

MTR - would they bother with 3'6" operations? ... guess they might ...

[ozbob]

Page 122  http://www.commissionofaudit.qld.gov.au/reports/coa-final-report-volume-1.pdf

B3.6.3 Bus services

Increases in the payment required to be made to operators (especially to BT) for the
provision of bus services are a significant financial risk for the State. As with rail services,
the increased efficiency of bus services is most effectively achieved by introducing
competitive pressure into service delivery.


To date, contracts for bus services have not been subjected to full competitive tendering.

This reflects both the tendering process itself and other barriers to entry, such as the sunk
investment made by existing contractors in fixed infrastructure, such as depots and
maintenance facilities. This tends to perpetuate the rollover of existing contracts rather than
the entry of new operators, leading to a lack of innovation and inefficiency.
The opportunity to set efficiency incentives occurs when the contracts are negotiated.

Tender processes for the Brisbane bus network should ensure there is competitive tension
for alternative bidders on price and quality of service offered.

The current contract term is seven years, the maximum allowed by the Transport Operations
(Passenger Transport) Act 1994. There is a strong economic rationale for long-term
contracts given the stranding risk faced by contract holders.

Options for seeking greater efficiency in the provision of bus services include:

Achieving greater efficiency through existing operator contracts – for example, by
contracting to an optimal number of operators, designing contracts with incentives for
continuous improvement and minimising constraints on contract holders to adapt to
market changes and innovate.

Creating competition in the market by placing all existing routes out to tender. The key
issue that would need to be considered in this option is dealing with the benefits of
incumbency of the existing bus operators in order to ensure that the tendering process
creates strong competitive tension.

Competitive tendering for reformed franchises. This means that the number of routes
and franchises are investigated first and reformed to achieve one-off savings in route
operations (through a reduction in dead running) and economies of scale in garaging
and maintenance. This will also ensure that each franchise offered is of a sufficient size
and scale to allow for efficient service delivery.

A critical issue will be the treatment of BT as a potential service provider in a competitive
tendering situation. As BT is the major incumbent with substantial sunk investment, as well
as being a business unit of BCC, there is likely to be significant concern from potential
tenderers about whether they will be bidding on even terms. Concerns about competitive
neutrality could fundamentally undermine the success of a tender.

The extent of savings under a competitive tendering model will depend on how well
Translink is able to negotiate contracts based on best practice. The experience in other
jurisdictions shows that prescriptive arrangements without incentives for operators to
innovate do not yield significant benefit.

Recommendation
17 Competitive tendering be introduced for bus service contracts throughout
Queensland, including evaluating the number of routes serviced and
frequencies, franchisees and franchise areas before initiating the tender.

[BrizCommuter]

http://brizcommuter.blogspot.com.au/2013/04/qr-citytrain-and-brisbane-transport-to.html
The BrizCommuter word on the potential privatisation of QR and Brisbane Transport.

[ozbob]

http://brizcommuter.blogspot.com.au/2013/04/qr-citytrain-and-brisbane-transport-to.html
The BrizCommuter word on the potential privatisation of QR and Brisbane Transport.

Yes, Brisbane Bus is open to contestability.  See above extract ...

And http://www.treasury.qld.gov.au/coa-response/better-services.shtml#B3_Public_Transport

17   

Competitive tendering be introduced for bus service contracts throughout Queensland, including evaluating the number of routes serviced and frequencies, franchisees and franchise areas before initiating the tender.
   
Accepted

The Government accepts this recommendation and notes that the reform of bus service contracts has been the subject of major investigation in the Department of Transport and Main Roads. The Government remains committed to strong value-for-money outcomes for Queensland taxpayers and the development of efficient and affordable bus services.

[#Metro]

Brisbane Transport must be separated from BCC. How? Change the City of Brisbane Act to induce divestment.

Nothing that Anna Bligh hasn't done

http://www.couriermail.com.au/news/opinion/queensland-asset-sell-off-the-only-choice-anna-bligh/story-e6frerdf-1225791479150

Queensland asset sell off the only choice: Anna Bligh
by:Premier Anna Bligh From: The Courier-Mail October 26, 2009 11:00PM 333 comments

IT'S time to separate myth from fact on the Queensland Government's plan to sell five state-owned commercial businesses.

The decision to sell these assets was the toughest I've faced as a politician and I understand the concern. I have been there myself. In the early 1990s, I opposed the sale of Qantas. Today, I can honestly say, I got it wrong.

Since privatisation, Qantas has become one of the world's top airlines. By going private, it could access funds government could no longer provide to invest in a new fleet and employ even more Australians.

At the state level, the logic is the same. Keeping these commercial businesses going over the next five years would cost Queenslanders $12 billion on new coal trains and wharves, money that could otherwise be spent on roads, schools and hospitals.

^ Gotta love politicians. They just tell you what you want to hear!

[Old Northern Road]

Oh the horrors of Privatisation in Victoria. Trams every 8 minutes on most routes or better, 10 minute trains all weekend on lines across the network, Metro pushing hard to get even more frequency... Patronage explosion so high that the whole system needs massive upgrade, low fares, lower than in Queensland, buses running to train stations, no political Maroon CityGliders, SmartBus orbital routes...

Brisbane Transport has not increased the frequency of the Great Circle Line for 25 years. It is still half hourly, just like it was way back in 1988.

Can't Imagine what will happen when MTR Hong Kong Takes over QR!! Shudder the thought that TransPerth might put in a bid as well...

All privately run bus companies in Brisbane currently only run at an hourly frequency at best so I'm not sure why you think privatisation will lead to an increase of services in Brisbane. Just as much of a chance that privatisation will lead to a reduction of services.

If the rail network is privatised then they will probably close down the Rosewood line and get rid of the guards and a lot of the station staff (which are all good things in my opinion).

[#Metro]

Nothing Anna hasn't already done!!

All privately run bus companies in Brisbane currently only run at an hourly frequency at best so I'm not sure why you think privatisation will lead to an increase of services in Brisbane. Just as much of a chance that privatisation will lead to a reduction of services.

If the rail network is privatised then they will probably close down the Rosewood line and get rid of the guards and a lot of the station staff (which are all good things in my opinion).

What about Gold Coast? Services run 24/7 on some corridors. All other operators  - 15 of them - are private. I don't think we will see decreases in frequency because that is impossible to sell in a tender process.

Importantly, a private operator would not be wedded to the inherently wasteful direct service model, which BCC seems to be unable to break outside of this philosophy, which means more bus services that are high frequency to more areas under a private operator (unless some MAJOR epiphany descends on BT and they relent and draw a connected network based on connections - unlikely).

Metro Trains also operate the Stony Point Line in Melbourne, so I can't see how the Rosewood line would lose service either.

[somebody]

All privately run bus companies in Brisbane currently only run at an hourly frequency at best so I'm not sure why you think privatisation will lead to an increase of services in Brisbane. Just as much of a chance that privatisation will lead to a reduction of services.

If the rail network is privatised then they will probably close down the Rosewood line and get rid of the guards and a lot of the station staff (which are all good things in my opinion).

555 runs every 15 minutes through the day.

In Sydney, the combination of the 610, 610X and M61 run every 10 minutes on a Saturday in the daytimes by a private operator.

[Stillwater]

Most probably there would be a 'community service component' payment to the private operator to run buses at night or early morning, when passenger revenue would not bring in sufficient money to meet the operating cost of that particular bus service.  In that case, the tender would go to the company that drew down the least amount by way of public financial subsidy to meet the agreed level of service stated in the contract with the private operator.

[#Metro]

I think the service should go to the operator that can offer the best coverage of BUZ services across Brisbane, Simple Network, Frequency, Legibility. Cost is important but not as important as decent network. We have a choice about what we value and can work off that. It is not like a case of going into a supermarket and asking what's cheapest - if that were the case we'd all eat flour paste for breakfast, lunch and tea - because that's cheapest. A qualitative approach and values alignment is also important - frequency, simplicity, legibility, span, integration with rail, all worth optimising for.

It's not just about cost. Benefits have to be looked at as well.

There are major competitive neutrality issues with BCC's ownership of BT. Indeed BT isn't even incorporated and doesn't have an ABN (to my knowledge) it's just a brand name/business name for city staff at BCC who manage and drive buses. What is to say that BCC would raise rate levies to fend off a private operator using it's taxing/rate levying powers???

[somebody]

Most probably there would be a 'community service component' payment to the private operator to run buses at night or early morning, when passenger revenue would not bring in sufficient money to meet the operating cost of that particular bus service.  In that case, the tender would go to the company that drew down the least amount by way of public financial subsidy to meet the agreed level of service stated in the contract with the private operator.

Not correct.  Translink bus services operate on a "fixed gross cost" model, which means they get a fixed payment for operating the service and all fare revenue reverts to the government.  They don't even get a bonus.  It's in the Act.

[Stillwater]

The move to a contestability model of delivery will require new legislation.  Who knows what it will contain.

[HappyTrainGuy]

If the rail network is privatised then they will probably close down the Rosewood line and get rid of the guards and a lot of the station staff (which are all good things in my opinion).

Nothing different than what QR has been trying to do for a while. QR wanted to get rid of guards from as far back as 94/95. The unions put on a couple strikes over the years as a result. Rosters for station staff have also changed from station based to rotation based (Pretty sure its now a job requirment for all station staff to have a drivers license as a result). Rosewood will be there to stay as it does get some really good numbers despite what the passenger tracker says.

On the Northside Thompsons (same with KBL/CBL - they both have a few 30 minute routes) only run hourly buses despite having a decent bus fleet number but you have to remember that a good number of their fleet aren't DDA compliant (for a constant PT service) as they are still a charter bus company rather than a complete dedicated public transport operator. BT are only set up for a public transport operator. They did have some dedicated charter buses about a decade ago but I think they were on loan from Greyhound or a private operator. You can still charter BT buses but good luck actually wanting to use them when it comes to storage areas, comfort, passenger numbers and speed. IIRC most of BT buses are speed restricted to 90kph while Thompsons/Kangaroo/Caboolture/Red and White charter buses are speed limited at 110kph which is why you see them doing alot of railway closures on the Gold Coast and Ipswich lines when they run along the highway/motorway. Back in 08ish I was on a BBL bus during an Ipswich closure and it ended up blowing/damaging a turbo as it red lined so much on the motorway all day long. Nothing like walking towards the station and just smelling a turbo about to kick it

[bagbuffy]

Privatising of BCC buses won't happen. Look at the outrage just over the Translink Review. The State Government Back Pedal as fast as they could  as well as the BCC.

If the State Government did privatise the BCC fleet, there won't be an LNP member holding a Brisbane Seat. It would be political Suicide for both the LNP State Government and City Council.

[ozbob]

515 runs every 15 minutes, go Ippy! Privatisation of BCC buses will not happen,  it will be 'contestable' ... lol

[ozbob]

Sent to all outlets:

1 May 2013

Costello Audit creates more uncertainty for bus users

Greetings,

We have previously called for the separation of Brisbane Transport (BT) from Brisbane City Council (BCC) and bus contracts to be thrown open to competition. The ICA has agreed that all bus contracts should be contestable, and tested for competitive tendering effectively.

The BCC Bus Review does not address any of the major systemic issues with the BT bus network.

If Brisbane Transport is so efficient and innovative as it claims to be, then it should have no objection to being subject to private competition. With Brisbane Transport's contract running out in 2014, we believe that TransLink should not automatically renew it. Throw it open to competitive tender as has been done in Melbourne and Sydney. Transit Australia Group, Grenda's and Perth's Swan Transit could all be approached for example.

All other 15 operators in SEQ are private. Has the sky fallen down? Brisbane City Council needs to explain exactly what is so special about its bus operations that no private company could ever replicate and why it couldn't just pay for more bus service without actually owning it.

The protected monopoly that BCC has had on buses must end. It has left the Brisbane suburbs of Centenary, Bulimba, The Northwest and Yeronga with poor bus services so it could put on the vanity service that is the Maroon CityGlider. There is no reason why BCC could not continue to pay TransLink if it wants more service, like other councils already do.  BCC does not properly support the rail network in a true integrated fashion, a fact highlighted with the TransLink Bus Review.  Two inefficient  major operators in competition does not make a proper cost efficient connected network!

We note that Brisbane Transport has dropped proposals for the merger of 111 + 555 bus services in their so called Bus Review, In our opinion, this is because it crossed council boundaries and would have opened up the possibility of Clark's Logan City Buses winning the contract to operate that route. Their dropping of this proposal appears to be against competitive neutrality principles. Indeed Brisbane Transport as an operator should not even be designing the bus routes - that's TransLink's job, who is the regulator?

The Lord Mayor and BCC can no longer be trusted to run the city's buses. After a decade of games, it's time to separate Brisbane Transport from Brisbane City Council.

This is now a real test for the Minister for Transport of Main Roads and the Newman Government. Will they put Queensland first, or kowtow to BCC.

Best wishes
Robert

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

References:

Audit creates more uncertainty for bus users
http://www.brisbanetimes.com.au/queensland/audit-creates-more-uncertainty-for-bus-users-20130430-2iqxa.html

Is the Qld government missing the bus?
http://blogs.crikey.com.au/theurbanist/2013/03/25/is-the-qld-government-missing-the-bus/

[ozbob]

Couriermail --> State seeks better, cheaper way to run buses and trains

[ozbob]

Brisbanetimes --> Audit creates more uncertainty for bus users

[ozbob]

I expect a revamped Queensland Rail will be competitive for contestability both for operation and maintenance. Time will tell ...

Brisbane Transport will have to improve their network model to be properly competitive.  Note, one of the recommendations is a proper route review.  BT would be well advised to go back to the TransLink review and incorporate routes that will improve integration and operation, reduce CBD bus numbers and air, route duplications and so forth.  Neither review is perfect but I believe there is a mid point.

[ozbob]

Media release 1st May 2013



Queensland: ICA Public Transport Outcomes

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 broadly welcomed the Independent Commission of Audit outcomes for public transport (1, 2).

Robert Dow, Spokesman for RAIL Back On Track said:

"Data released yesterday by TransLink has confirmed patronage and fares are at rock bottom (3)."

"Clearly it is time for change.  We welcome contestability for public transport operation both rail and bus.  We are confident that Queensland Rail can be competitive for train operation."

"We welcome contestability for all bus contracts.  Fifteen of the 16 bus operators in south-east Queensland are private and there is no reason why Brisbane Transport should not also be made to compete."

"We urge careful consideration with rail network maintenance outsourcing.  Queensland is a huge state with a considerable rail network.  Fragmentation of that maintenance task is likely to lose any economy of scale, and lead to less than optimal outcomes both for safety and cost in the longer term.  Queensland Rail is a very safe rail operator and we want that safety level maintained. "

References:

1. Public Transport
http://www.treasury.qld.gov.au/coa-response/better-services.shtml#B3_Public_Transport

2. Poll: ICA - Public Transport Outcomes http://railbotforum.org/mbs/index.php?topic=9902.0

3. The great fare fail ... http://railbotforum.org/mbs/index.php?topic=9292.msg125413#msg125413

Contact:

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

[ozbob]

Interview on 612 ABC Brisbane Breakfast with Spencer Howson this morning with the Minister for Transport and Main Roads, Scott Emerson, followed by yours truly on PT ICA outcomes.

Hopefully be up later today on the blog.

Thanks for the interest 612!

[nathandavid88]

One question I would pose about putting bus services out to tender: should we have a single operator for all BT service areas, or would there be merit in splitting up the area somewhat to potentially get more than one operator in. Allow LCBS to try and take over services in the southern suburbs (the 140 & 150 for example), Veolia could apply for services out towards Redlands, Mt Gravatt Bus Lines could try for more etc? (Mt G Bus Lines are a bit of an oddity, a private operator that runs exclusively within BCC boundaries) 

Or would offering the whole lot to a single operator provide a better outcome?