Article: Melbourne back on top as Sydney falls

[ozbob]

From the Melbourne Age click here!

Melbourne back on top as Sydney falls

Melbourne back on top as Sydney falls
August 14, 2012 - 2:48PM
Jason Dowling

It may bring an ironic smile to the face of former premier John Brumby. He lost office by the thinnest of margins in 2010 as commuters struggled with overcrowded trains and patients faced long delays in hospital waiting rooms, but now Melbourne's infrastructure has now won top marks on the international stage.

Melbourne has officially retained its title as the world's most "liveable city" in a survey of 140 cities, thanks to perfect scores for healthcare, education  and infrastructure.

It is the second year running Melbourne has been crowned the world's move liveable city in a survey conducted by the Economist Intelligence Unit.

And this year, Adelaide has overtaken Sydney in the liveability stakes. Adelaide rose three places to joint fifth place in the rankings because of improved infrastructure. Sydney came in seventh.
Melbourne scored 97.5 per cent in the survey.
Advertisement

It will surprise few to learn we lost points for our climate.

Melbourne also lost points for culture - which might come as a shock to some - and was also marked down for petty crime.

Melbourne scored 95.1 for culture - more than Adelaide, Sydney and Perth, but below Vancouver, which received a perfect score of 100 for culture, and Toronto's 97.2.

Music Victoria chief executive Patrick Donovan said he was ''very, very surprised'', Melbourne had been marked down for culture.

''Melbourne's one of the top music cities in the world, a claim backed up recently when Music Max [pay television channel] concentrated on six great music cities in the world and one of them was Melbourne,'' he said.

He said Melbourne had 370 venues providing fantastic live music.

''You can see any style of music any night of the week at any number of venues - we are the envy of the international music community,''  he said.

Other cities to perform well overall in the survey  were Vienna,  second with 97.4, and Vancouver with 97.3.

Cities are ranked on factors including stability, healthcare, culture and environment, education and infrastructure.

Perth was ranked in ninth position.

The world's top 10 most livable cities:

1. Melbourne, Australia.

2. Vienna, Austria.

3. Vancouver, Canada.

4. Toronto, Canada.

5. Calgary, Canada.

5. (equal) Adelaide, Australia.

7. Sydney, Australia.

8. Helsinki, Finland.

9. Perth, Australia.

10. Auckland, New Zealand.

(20. Brisbane, Australia.)

A summary of the full report is available at www.eiu.com/liveability2012

Read more: http://www.theage.com.au/travel/travel-news/melbourne-back-on-top-as-sydney-falls-20120814-245ps.html#ixzz23VUMo8UL

[ozbob]

Oh the shame of it all ....  behind Adelaide!   

[Otto]

I thought Brisbane would have been ranked 140th...


Oh wait, They only surveyed 140 cities... 

[Stillwater]

Brisbane would be ranked No.1 in the underground city stakes.

[somebody]

Oh the shame of it all ....  behind Adelaide!   

I don't doubt that is fair.

[ozbob]

From the Couriermail click here!

Brisbane leaders in disbelief at our city's low liveability ranking

Brisbane leaders in disbelief at our city's low liveability ranking

    by: James McCullough
    From: The Courier-Mail
    August 15, 2012 12:00AM

QUEENSLAND tourism and business chiefs have slammed a controversial international survey by the prestigious Economist magazine which ranks Adelaide, Sydney, Melbourne and Perth as more liveable cities than Brisbane on the world map.

The Global Liveability survey by the Economist Intelligence Unit of 140 worldwide cities names Melbourne as the most liveable city on the planet, followed by Vienna in Austria, and Vancouver, Toronto and Calgary in Canada.

Adelaide ranks as the fifth most liveable city in the world, followed by Sydney (7th) and Perth (9th). Auckland, New Zealand ranks 10th while Brisbane is way back in the field, listed as No.20.

Well-known Brisbane company director and tourism entrepreneur Jim Kennedy describes the survey as "simply rubbish".

"After all, if you want to live in a cemetery, live in Adelaide. I travelled there often while I was a board member of Santos and I couldn't wait to get out of the place. It simply doesn't compare with Brisbane."

Mr Kennedy, who has chaired several tourism bodies and run numerous tropical islands in Queensland, said the state offered much including the Outback, Sunshine and Gold coasts and Port Douglas.

"We have much better weather. This survey also depends on the age group of people doing it and the criteria set. How could you compare Vienna or Toronto with Brisbane?" he said.

"You can play golf here 52 weeks in the year and swim most days. We have beaches and sunshine and many people are moving here. Anyone who comes up with a survey suggesting that Adelaide is more liveable than Brisbane has been living in a cave."

The state's wealthiest person Clive Palmer also laughed at suggestions Adelaide was more liveable than Brisbane.

"I find that very hard to believe," he said before jumping on his new jet last night.

RBS Morgans chief economist Michael Knox, who has lived in both Adelaide and Brisbane, didn't think Adelaide was more liveable than Brisbane. "Brisbane has more performing arts and infrastructure than Adelaide and I do not think it is more liveable," he said.

However, he pointed out that Melbourne and Adelaide were carefully planned cities in the late 19th century while Brisbane was not. "I think the people that designed Melbourne were the more far-sighted of the city fathers. And then Melbourne was the second largest city after London in the British Empire at the end of the 19th century."

The global liveability report surveys locations around the world to assess the best or the worst living conditions.

Cities are scored on political and social stability, crime rates and access to quality health care. It also measures the diversity and standard of cultural events and the natural environment; education; and the standard of infrastructure, including public transport.

"Australian cities continue to thrive in terms of liveability - not only do they benefit from the natural advantages of low population density, but they have continued to improve with some high-profile infrastructure investments," Economist Intelligence Unit survey editor Jon Copestake said.

[ozbob]

Melbourne Age --> Melbourne again most liveable city

[ozbob]

Sent to all outlets:

15th August 2012

Oh, the shame of it all ..

Greetings,

Interesting the hysterical responses of denial in Brisbane following the Economic Intelligence Unit's Report: Livability Ranking and Overview August 2012.
http://www.eiu.com/liveability2012

Brisbane only manages a 20th place, a long way behind Melbourne (number 1), Adelaide (6), Sydney (7), Perth (9).

No surprise to us. Hate to tell you this but public transport in Brisbane is definitely NOT ' world class ' ...

A metropolis addicted to non-performing car solutions is doomed to mediocrity.

Time to get real don't you think?  Here is the road map to success -->  http://railbotforum.org/mbs/index.php?board=19.0

Best wishes
Robert

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

[ozbob]

Congestion and under-performing public transport is getting a fair share of mention in the blog on the CM article --> here!

[SurfRail]

I can't take credibly anything that ranks Adelaide AND Auckland ahead of Brisbane, much less both in the top 10 while Brisbane is not.

[#Metro]

Adelaide doesn't have as much congestion mess as we do.

Perth has the best train system in all of Australia, and even more so for a city of it's small size

Melbourne and Sydney are big-format cities, and judging from my trip down last weekend, it is very easy to get around without a car now that many lines have 15 or even 10 minute (!) frequency as standard.

Brisbane is getting there, but train system is rubbish. Sorry, but freight and passenger need to be progressively separated (can't be good at both at the same time) and frequency upped in a massive way. I was thinking of what to compare the Brisbane train system to over the last weekend while in Melbourne (on a 10 minute frequency Frankston train, no less!!) and Brisbane's train system really is like some kind of emergency-only equipment or safety gear - well maintained, a lot of money spent on it, looks good, new things everywhere, BUT NEVER ACTUALLY USED BY 90% OF PEOPLE because it is just TOO infrequent.

[#Metro]

http://www.humantransit.org/2011/05/top-ten-rankings-the-1-way-to-confuse.html

[somebody]

I can't take credibly anything that ranks Adelaide AND Auckland ahead of Brisbane, much less both in the top 10 while Brisbane is not.

Adelaide's peak hour lasts about 10 minutes.  Or perhaps that's increased in recent years.  Either way it's not nearly as congested as Brisbane and Adelaide has nicer weather IMO.  Neither town has very much to see or do or a surf beach.  Brisbane does have some nice hinterland areas around it.

[Gazza]

Brisbane does have some nice hinterland areas around it.

As does Adelaide.

[somebody]

Adelaide does have heat, but I'd rather the dry heat than the mugginess.

Brisbane does have some nice hinterland areas around it.

As does Adelaide.

Barossa Valley?  I think that's about all.

[colinw]

Frankly, I don't pay any attention at all to these kind of studies.  They have about as much credibility as "airline of the year", and the ratings seem to juggle around year by year based on subjective metrics that mean SFA to the average person trying to eke out an existence in the 'burbs.

Storm in a teacup. 

[Golliwog]

Frankly, I don't pay any attention at all to these kind of studies.  They have about as much credibility as "airline of the year", and the ratings seem to juggle around year by year based on subjective metrics that mean SFA to the average person trying to eke out an existence in the 'burbs.

Storm in a teacup. 

+1

[HappyTrainGuy]

Frankly, I don't pay any attention at all to these kind of studies.  They have about as much credibility as "airline of the year", and the ratings seem to juggle around year by year based on subjective metrics that mean SFA to the average person trying to eke out an existence in the 'burbs.

Storm in a teacup. 

[ozbob]

Behind Adelaide .... WAAAAHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHAAAAAAAAAAAAAA