Article: Lack of high-speed rail 'criminal'

[ozbob]

From the Melbourne Age click here!

Lack of high-speed rail 'criminal'

Lack of high-speed rail 'criminal'
November 27, 2012 - 6:54PM Clay Lucas

Australia's lack of high-speed railway lines is "criminal", while decades of neglecting rail by both sides of politics has left the nation far behind the rest of the world, the country's best-known unionist has said.

And voters across most Australian states cannot be blamed for being sceptical when politicians promise new rail lines, Australian Workers Union national secretary Paul Howes has said.

Speaking at the Australasian Railway Association's national conference in Canberra on Tuesday, Mr Howes said both conservative and Labor state governments had "made an art form" of promising new rail projects, only to later renege on their promises.

"Governments around the country announce, re-announce, tear up, re-draw, re-plan and re-announce transport plans that are unfunded, un-costed, and due to start construction on the never-never," he said.

"As a result you can hardly blame the public and business for being a touch sceptical whenever a politician promises a new rail line."

The Baillieu government has embarked on studies for new rail lines to Doncaster, Rowvillle and the Melbourne and Avalon airports. Its Labor predecessor was also elected in 1999 with similarly ambitious plans to build new metropolitan rail lines, only to later withdraw them, saying they were too expensive.

Because of government inaction, rail had not achieved anywhere near its true potential in Australia, Mr Howes said. "Australia has an infrastructure deficit of somewhere near 1 trillion dollars, and rail under-investment is just one sad story within this broader policy failure," he said.

The best example, he said, was the failure to build Sydney's second airport: "I find it hard to believe that we will ever see more than just papers and announcements about studies for [this] airport. There's no political will and there's no cash to make it happen."

But he said the idea of a high-speed rail link between Canberra and Sydney needed to happen.

"In most other developed countries, fast rail is being built to link major cities and to provide relief from our crowded skies," said Mr Howes, comparing Australia's inaction to China – which has the largest high-speed rail network in the world. The United States and United Kingdom governments were also working hard on plans for high-speed rail investment. "And yet where are we on this issue after all of our government papers, studies and consultations?"

Mr Howes said he had flown to Canberra to speak at the conference instead of taking the 287-kilometre train trip. "The fact that it takes over four hours to travel between our nation's capital and our largest city is quite frankly ridiculous," he said. "Comparative trips in Asia, North America and Europe would take less than half the time."

The fast-rail project was a "once-in-a-generation nation-building projects that deserves the full support and commitment of both the Federal and state governments", Mr Howes said.

Read more: http://www.theage.com.au/opinion/political-news/lack-of-highspeed-rail-criminal-20121127-2a5l7.html

[Gazza]

Yeah, I mean HSR would be nice and all, but it's not that much of an improvement of air travel in Aus.

What is criminal is the way ordinary freight and urban rail projects just never seem to happen, or get delayed all the time.

[Jonno]

Yeah, I mean HSR would be nice and all, but it's not that much of an improvement of air travel in Aus.

What is criminal is the way ordinary freight and urban rail projects just never seem to happen, or get delayed all the time.

+1,000,000

[ozbob]

Brisbanetimes --> Regional high-speed rail forecast as $48b winner

[somebody]

"Criminal" would be building a HSR spending endless billions of taxpayers money to compete against a efficent private sector airline industry and leave the interstate freights to rot on 19th century infrastructure alignments and let our cities to continue to suffer from modern PT systems.

+1

[colinw]

"Criminal" would be building a HSR spending endless billions of taxpayers money to compete against a efficent private sector airline industry and leave the interstate freights to rot on 19th century infrastructure alignments and let our cities to continue to suffer from modern PT systems.

While I agree we're not ready for HSR yet, I would not characterise Australia's airline system as "efficient" by any means.

QANTAS mainline is on its knees & international is moribund and probably heading toward oblivion. Jetstar is showing profits primarily by devious cost shifting to Qantas main line (e.g. QF buys modern aircraft, shifts 'em to Jetstar while continuing to fly ancient 767s, and JQ planes magically transfer back to QF just as they need major maintenance).  Frankly it is beyond me how Dixon & co stayed out of jail, if we had anything even vaguely resembling a sane regulation system in this country they would be facing some serious investigative heat.  Take away QF and the sham that is Jetstar would be exposed (not to mention what a complete debacle their Asian premium airline mess is).  As for the recent decision to give up slots in the queue for 787s, while continuing to fly 767s which haven't even had some of the fuel efficiency mods that other airlines (e.g. Air NZ) have fitted ...  It amazes me that Qantas haven't followed Ansett into a well deserved corporate grave.  When they do, Jetstar will no doubt continue, although will suddenly be found to be nowhere near as profitable as a gullible public are led to believe it is.

Virgin is better off, thanks in part to hiring Borghetti, and also due to less unionised workforce and much newer fleet. I bet Qantas wishes they hadn't shafted him now!

The whole mess 'though is barely profitable and it would not surprise me to see public funds going in to prop up the industry, as worldwide it is a loss making game propped up by the public purse and sustained for reasons of national pride in many cases.

Keep your heads in the sand gentlemen.  The world is changing, but as Australians we're too bloody thick to notice and (like our American cousins) stick obstinately to a failed paradigm that peaked in the 1980s.

[somebody]

continuing to fly ancient 767s,

I would say that the 767s are probably the most efficient aircraft from a cost point of view that they could be flying domestically for markets with little air freight, like (presumably) SYD-MEL and SYD-BNE.  Only SYD-Hawaii remains 767 on the international network.

767s are lighter than A330s or 787s and have comparable engines to the former.  They're a bit more thirsty per passenger than a narrow body, but make up for it in crewing, ownership and maintenance costs spread over more passengers.  They're also worth next to nothing.

There's numerous criticisms which I would level at QF management, but this isn't one of them.

Virgin is better off, thanks in part to hiring Borghetti, and also due to less unionised workforce and much newer fleet. I bet Qantas wishes they hadn't shafted him now!

You aren't the only one saying this by any stretch!

[colinw]

767s are lighter than A330s or 787s and have comparable engines to the former.  They're a bit more thirsty per passenger than a narrow body, but make up for it in crewing, ownership and maintenance costs spread over more passengers.  They're also worth next to nothing.

Huh?  From what I'm reading the fuel burn of the 787 is some 20% lower than the 767, and given that QF haven't gone for the fuel efficiency upgrades like (for example) Air NZ did.

Don't know how an A330 compares, although I thought I read somewhere that it is comparable or even slightly worse.

[somebody]

Depends on the mission.  787 needs higher longer sectors to get much benefit.

Adding to this, on a SYD-MEL sector, BOTH planes use little fuel.  More important is leasing, maintenance and (especially) crewing.

[colinw]

The govt does not need to spend $50B of taxpayers money trying to provide a limited alt service on one sector that in itself will loose more money annually than any govt bailout to the airlines will ever pay. If someone else wants to build HSR, go for it, but with my tax dollars, F__k no!

Sounds like a suburban rail line to me!

[SurfRail]

You know - if they can make it stack up like NBN to the point where it actually results in virtually no impost to the budget over time - I'll have no objection whatsoever to a few billion being thrown at it to seed-fund it initially.

I've no interest in huge sums coming off the budget or being generated by debt to build it the old-fashioned way. 

[Jonno]

Sam

You know - if they can make it stack up like NBN to the point where it actually results in virtually no impost to the budget over time - I'll have no objection whatsoever to a few billion being thrown at it to seed-fund it initially.

I've no interest in huge sums coming off the budget or being generated by debt to build it the old-fashioned way. 

same here.  We need them to stop spending on freeways and redirect to freight rail & public/active transport