BaT - Bus and Train project (was UBAT, was no CRR)

[ozbob]

The new platforms should be built to handle nine-car sets. BaT would not be needed if the current stations were that long. This is likely to be the long new line in the city for quite some time so get it right!

Agree.  However they have indicated platform lengths of 170 m.  I have asked the question before OK if platform lengths 170m (7 car) will the station cavity be large enough to extend to 9 car length ..... " crickets " ...

[ozbob]

You couldn't make this stuff up hey? 

[Derwan]

Facebook post on the acronym issue is up:  http://4nd.de/OAVKFp

Get liking! 

[SteelPan]

Points re the "naming comp" (hint to govts - why give yourself the grief!!!)

1 - Congratulations to the "winner"

2 - Sadly, it would appear the winner [likely without intent] has broken the rules - but in the 21stC who's going to care about "sportsmanship" 

3 - The "no acronyms" rule no doubt limited the entries of those who, having read the rules, followed them and expected them to mean something.

4 - The rule requiring an entry to explain the purpose of the tunnel was however, just weird, most other "named" infrastructure has ZERO to do with what the actual piece of infrastructure concerned does.   :conf

Conclusion - tip to govt, why give yourself the grief?  IF however, you do decide you want to run a comp, think through who's involved, what the rules are, stand by them and may be have some recognized standards for making the final selection by impartial people!

Appears to be a stuff up and confirms my thinking expressed recently in this very forum - the short list was indeed short - of quality candidates! 

QUICK boy blunder, back to the....

[red dragin]

Boy Blunder!

Seems the perfect name for the Transport minister. ...

Bus review
Fair fail
Naming competition
Nambour upgrade

Etc etc.

[ozbob]

Sent to all outlets:

20th March 2014

Holy BaT fail

Greetings,

It has to be said, naming of the dual bus and rail tunnel for Brisbane as the BaT - Bus and Train tunnel is disappointing. All other major infrastructure in Brisbane is generally named after a prominent Queenslander or a significant community organisation. For example, Legacy Way, the Willam Jolly Bridge, Clem 7 Tunnel and so forth. Naming the bus and train tunnel as the Bus and Train tunnel BaT - is the equivalent of calling the Clem 7 the 'Car tunnel'.

It was also disappointing that the terms and conditions of the naming competition were not upheld (1). The terms and conditions no doubt had an influence on the sort of names many submitted.

The BaT naming fiasco does not build confidence for the successful delivery of this project.

I hope I am wrong.

Best wishes
Robert

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


Reference:

1. https://www.getinvolved.qld.gov.au/gi/consultation/1917/view.html

[ozbob]

Couriermail --> Brisbane BaT Tunnel will be built despite financial constraints, vows Queensland Premier Campbell Newman

[ozbob]

Brisbanetimes --> Brisbane's BaT Tunnel - who will pay the $5b tab?

[#Metro]

It is customary not to include conjunctives (and, or, etc.) in an acronym. When the 'a' is removed in line with custom it spells BT, the acronym for Brisbane Transport, a division of BCC.

Bad omen? 

</conspiracy theory>

[Jonno]

Given the performance of the Car Tunnels they should have stuck to Bankrupt Car Tunnel 1, Bankrupt Car Tunnel 2, Bankrupt Car Tunnel 3?

[#Metro]

Let them do their thing. If there is anything fishy about it, it will be flushed out in due course because you just cannot hide things that don't make financial of physical sense for long. NSW Goverment tried government by glossy media release and the ridiculous Sydney metro (apparently cooked up on the back of a restaurant napkin) and subsequently retro-justified ultimately collapsed and eventually took the gov't along with it.

It is ironic that the tunnel has been named by an RACQ employee. Ha!!

It seems unlikely the Abbott Government will fund this project as they have stated no funding for urban rail (urban busway would seem to be included in the spirit of that comment despite the different vehicle propulsion used) and the fact that the state has privatisable assets that can be sold to fund this proposed public asset.

My reply to this kind of statement is to simply say 'Go look at the Australian Constitution":

COMMONWEALTH OF AUSTRALIA CONSTITUTION ACT - SECT 51
Legislative powers of the Parliament
The Parliament shall, subject to this Constitution, have power to make laws for the peace, order, and good government of the Commonwealth with respect to:

(xxxiv)  railway construction and extension in any State with the consent of that State;

I interpret this as including the power to make a law for appropriation of budgeted funds for construction of said railways.

[ozbob]

Boy Blunder!

Seems the perfect name for the Transport minister. ...

Bus review
Fair fail
Naming competition
Nambour upgrade

Etc etc.

Boy Blunder is already in use for another Cabinet Minister ...

[Stillwater]

Is it just me?  Queensland Government has got no project, no funding.  But it has a name.  That is it.  A name.  With the amount of hype about the naming of this thing, the Premier should declare a public holiday once the funding is secured, if relativities are to be maintained.

The feds would require a business case before handing over billions for the BaT.  A chopped up and rehashed CRR business case won't suffice, I would think.  It would be a different funding model for starters.  Private enterprise would demand a pretty comprehensive document, and there would be the usual argy-bargy around financial risk.  If you think that is not important, look at the failed commercial road tunnel projects.

A full-blown, rock solid business case would take 18 months to prepare -- beyond the next election.

Watch this space.  Now we have the name, a band of spin doctors will be put to work planning the grand turning of the first shovel-load of dirt.  Hey, there might even be commemorative mugs and key rings!

It would be a pity of Queensland went for the glitz and the glamour before the hard work preparing a business case and securing funding off the back of that case.  Otherwise, what is in a name?

[ozbob]

^ I hope there is a glossy brochure/booklet, I collect them.   " Once in a generation projects " deserve nothing less.

Mrs Ozbob asked me if the Bus and Train tunnel was the name for the new transport tunnel.  I said it was.  She then said "Oh, that is like calling our dog Dog!" At which point our 2 yo 6 mo grand daughter Ava chimmed in "No, it is not dog it is Missy .. "  [Missy is our dog]  ...

Same bat channel, same bat time, for the next bat installment!

[#Metro]

I don't understand what the cynicism is about. I think it will ultimately be funded, the LNP had the chance to kill the project outright but it chose not to. BCC needs the tunnel built because failure to do so will mean the collapse of the bus network under the groan of thousands of buses operating in a hi-waste model flooding limited capacity in CBD streets.

I don't know what the focus is about with The Private Sector, as if they are cashed up angels descending from financial heaven with wads of cash. It doesn't work that way, the private sector has to be involved anyway as public servants aren't going to be pouring concrete or operating the bobcats etc.

The cost will ultimately be borne by the public sector, either through paying for the cost upfront or paying private manager to manage the tunnel and pay availability payments over time. There is no free lunch with private sector involvement and they are not 'going to be paying for it'.

[ozbob]

As evidenced this morning, Brisbane media is somewhat cynical about funding. 

The examples which involve PT that Nicholls is quoting above at Brisbanetimes were all put in place by the ALP. 

Their cynicism is well founded ...

If Abbott et al want to survive they will have shift eventually.

[ozbob]

Interesting blog post at Brisbanetimes --> http://www.brisbanetimes.com.au/queensland/brisbanes-bat-tunnel--who-will-pay-the-5b-tab-20140319-352yt.html#comments

I really hope this woeful project goes unfunded and is cancelled. It is better to do nothing, than to build a project so ill thought out.

    Compared to the original Cross River Rail this project is a fatally flawed waste of money:

    - Buses competing with rail, and running in the same corridor, as opposed to world's best practice which is for bus to feed rail. This project also concentrates ye more bus capacity into the already well served south east corridor.

    - Dutton Park Station closed: no rail access to PA hospital.

    - No Park Road station: present interchange between Beenleigh/Gold. Coast lines and Cleveland Line and busway to UQ removed.

    -New city centre station in wrong place: jammed up against river in George St near Government buildings instead of centrally located in Albert St near commercial heart of city.

    - No track capacity improvements south to Salisbury, so will do little to permit more frequent Beenleigh or Gold Coast trains, let alone the proposed new line to Browns Plains, Greenbank and Flagstone.

    - Feeds exhibition line, but no flyovers where that joins northern lines between Bowen Hills and Albion: end result will be conflicting moves and congestion just north of Bowen Hills.

    In short this project saves $3 billion from CRR by cutting the capacity enhancements on the rest of the network that were correctly scoped as part of the original project.

    The tunnel by itself is a false economy that will cost additional billions when the rectifying work is inevitability required. Final cost will end up being higher than CRR once all necessary work happens, but even then the stupidity like loss of interchange at Park Road will remain.

    In my opinion it is better to do nothing than build this half baked project.

Read more: http://www.brisbanetimes.com.au/queensland/brisbanes-bat-tunnel--who-will-pay-the-5b-tab-20140319-352yt.html

[SurfRail]

Going from the handle of the poster I think that is our long-departed (sadly) fellow traveller from Kuraby.

[SurfRail]

Is it just me or is there no evidence of a connection from Legacy Way / the ICB into BaT coming from the west?  There appears to be an on-ramp onto the ICB heading to the west, which branches from the current busway entrance off Bowen Bridge Rd.

There doesn't seem to be provision for an inbound connection anywhere around Kelvin Grove into the existing INB either going from the Legacy Way alignment maps.

[ozbob]

This is what was said last year ..

http://statements.cabinet.qld.gov.au/Statement/2013/11/19/undergrounds-legacy-connection

Media Statements
Minister for Transport and Main Roads
The Honourable Scott Emerson

Tuesday, November 19, 2013

Underground's Legacy connection

Brisbane's newest tunnel will link up with Brisbane's future tunnel under a Newman Government plan to integrate public transport across south east Queensland.

Transport and Main Roads Minister Scott Emerson said buses from the Underground Bus and Train project would connect with Legacy Way, delivering on the election promise of better infrastructure and planning.

"This is a great outcome for those travelling by bus to or from the city and the outer western and Centenary suburbs, saving 10 to 15 minutes," Mr Emerson said.

"It will also ease congestion along Coronation Dr and Milton Rd and will ensure Legacy Way is a vital part of south east Queensland's public transport network.

Mr Emerson said inbound buses would use the connection between the Inner City Bypass, Gilchrist Avenue and the Northern Busway, onto the new underground busway.

In the outbound direction, buses would come from the underground and use a new west-facing on-ramp to the Inner City Bypass and then onto Legacy Way.

Lord Mayor Graham Quirk said the innovative project was a great example of different levels of government working together to address the city's public transport capacity issues.

"It connects Brisbane's northern and southern busways and provides access from the western suburbs via Legacy Way to give buses a congestion-free run beneath the inner city and reduce travel times out into the suburbs," he said.

"The biggest beneficiaries will be public transport users, commuters and freight operators who will spend less time in congestion.

"The Underground Bus and Train project will revolutionise Brisbane's bus service by filling a critical gap in the busway network through the busiest part of the city."

The Underground Bus and Train project is a 15-metre wide, 5.4 kilometre tunnel with two train lines in the lower section and two busway lanes in the upper section.

It will be delivered at a cost of $5 billion, $3 billion less than Labor's fanciful proposal.

The project will also include three state-of-the-art train stations located 35 to 40 metres below Brisbane's CBD and Woolloongabba. A route map is available at www.tmr.qld.gov.au/ubat

[James]

I don't understand what the cynicism is about. I think it will ultimately be funded, the LNP had the chance to kill the project outright but it chose not to. BCC needs the tunnel built because failure to do so will mean the collapse of the bus network under the groan of thousands of buses operating in a hi-waste model flooding limited capacity in CBD streets.

I don't know what the focus is about with The Private Sector, as if they are cashed up angels descending from financial heaven with wads of cash. It doesn't work that way, the private sector has to be involved anyway as public servants aren't going to be pouring concrete or operating the bobcats etc.

The cost will ultimately be borne by the public sector, either through paying for the cost upfront or paying private manager to manage the tunnel and pay availability payments over time. There is no free lunch with private sector involvement and they are not 'going to be paying for it'.

The bus network is already starting to groan and strain, Lapdog. If you listen carefully you can hear the buckling and straining at the Cultural Centre every day around 8:15am and 4:45pm.

The entire network is under strain, unfortunately it is too late to not do anything. While I think BUM (I refuse to call it BaT because it breaks the rules of the competition and has to be the dumbest acronym I've ever heard) is half-baked and simply appallingly done, it is to the point where not doing anything is just as bad. The road network is also under strain.

Yes, there is debt and yes, the interest on UBAT/CRR/whatever would suffocate the government. But it is too late to not do anything. The road network is reaching melting point. The rail network is at capacity and requires serious track amplifications in order to make it more efficient. The bus network is seriously broken and cannot effectively feed rail without track amplifications in many areas.

[paulg]

Hi all,
Here is the draft reference design as a series of image overlays in Google Earth:

https://www.dropbox.com/s/5eikhvnd7qw3p9l/BaT%20Tunnel.kmz

Regards, Paul

[dancingmongoose]

That was a very long term plan for an extended CRR that included a new line along the North West Transport Corridor. You won't see trains running Alderley -> Strathpine for a very long time yet I suspect. They could very well be planning to change the pairings and have Varsity Lakes trains go somewhere other than the Airport - I'm just intrigued to know what exactly they will propose.

I don't even know if Alderley to Strathpine is even still happening, but that was just the original intention.

This was the original CRR plan, I don't see why it would need to change much, although there is no Park Road anymore so that may influence it. Notice both Beenleigh and GC trains going through the tunnel with a non-tunnel terminus at Kuraby, however it is for AM peak.

[paulg]

^  Yes I suppose that is the sort of arrangement they will go for. Will be messy at Bowen Hills though.

The original CRR did have a viaduct which eliminated the at-grade intersection between the Exhibition lines and the Mains:
https://www.dropbox.com/s/4q2pc3hmxfki9qd/Pdf-crr-eis-general-arrangement-22.pdf

Without that, you'll have a very messy junction at Bowen Hills. Following the colour scheme of the diagram you posted, there would be conflicts with Ferny Grove, Airport, Doomben and Shorncliffe lines all merging for a short section:



Other ideas?

[HappyTrainGuy]

Short term: Terminates at Roma Street depending on network/rollingstock limitations
Medium term: They form Caboolture express and Nambour express services in conjunction with current services meaning Bowen Hills only has the one conflict with exhibition/mains services.

eg:
Ipswich-Caboolture express 2tph.
Gold Coast-Roma Street/Caboolture express 2tph
(Roma Street-Caboolture express service total 4tph (2x Exhibition loop/2x Central) with every 'X' service continuing to Nambour)
Springfield-Kippa Ring all stoppers 4tph

or they form the new Caboolture line corridor with Ipswich services becoming Ipswich-Bowen Hills services.

Long term: NWTC/junctions etc

[dancingmongoose]

^  Yes I suppose that is the sort of arrangement they will go for. Will be messy at Bowen Hills though.

I suspect said mess at Bowen Hills is exactly why Alderley to Strathpine was being planned, so that they could go straight onto the Ferny Line which has substantially less traffic than the 'core' lines

[paulg]

I suspect said mess at Bowen Hills is exactly why Alderley to Strathpine was being planned, so that they could go straight onto the Ferny Line which has substantially less traffic than the 'core' lines

No, the CRR proposal was for an eventual extension of the CRR tracks from the northern tunnel portal in Victoria Park into another tunnel emerging somewhere near Alderley and then on the NWTC to Strathpine.

Cheers

[longboi]

Is it just me or is there no evidence of a connection from Legacy Way / the ICB into BaT coming from the west?  There appears to be an on-ramp onto the ICB heading to the west, which branches from the current busway entrance off Bowen Bridge Rd.

There doesn't seem to be provision for an inbound connection anywhere around Kelvin Grove into the existing INB either going from the Legacy Way alignment maps.

There is already an eastbound off-ramp onto Gilchrist Ave.

Inbound buses from the west will be able to turn right on to the INB or left on to the BaT tunnel.

[SurfRail]

Yep, noted that now.  Not being a motorist (and in particular not being a Brisbane motorist) I often miss those finer details!

[pandmaster]

Apart from the lack of a Park Road station and the poor station location in the city, the train aspect makes sense. It serves Woolloongabba and another part of the city and relieves the Merivale Bridge. I am not sure of the merits of the bus component.

• BaT duplicates the RBWH - Roma Street - Boggo Road/Woolloongabba busway corridor.
• KGS is the most central transit station in the city, certainly more than the proposed George Street station. BaT will divert passengers to an inferior city location.
• Where exactly will people be going that BaT will take you to? QUT Gardens Point and the government precinct will certainly attract patronage, but enough to justify billions of dollars? The Goodwill Bridge links the area to the South Bank stations quite well already.
• The SE Busway connection, as pictured, will make the incredibly busy Eastern Busway even worse with traffic lights in between Park Road and PAH. If you use the Northern or SE Busway today which will feed the tunnel, why would you want to take a bus that uses BaT instead of a Myer Centre/KGS/Cultural Centre bus?
• Boggo Road station is inundated during peak uni periods with passengers transferring to/from trains, some of which will instead transfer at Woolloongabba if BaT is built. The present system works well as Park Road receives very little non-university traffic and thus segregates city and university commuters. Park Road presently has ample capacity while Woolloongabba station would be busy enough without university traffic.

TL;DR: The bus aspect of BaT duplicates the existing busway almost completely. The city station will be poorly located and a lot of passengers would be closer to their destination at KGS/Myer Centre station. Running express buses stopping only at future BaT stations using the present busway would achieve a similar outcome for bus passengers. The only benefit for bus passengers I can see is *slightly* reduced journey times and improved access to QUT and the government precinct. These areas and the Queen Street Mall  could be served by moving the station along George Street to the intersection with Adelaide Street.

Completely separating the busway and road traffic around the Cultural Centre (at the casino and Melbourne street) in addition to network improvements would surely be a cheaper alternative with similar benefits.

BaT is a "world first" because no other city has been stupid enough to build a bus and train tunnel.

[ozbob]

" No acronyms " --



Anyway, for your information ...

From the Sunday Mail 23rd March 2014 page 27

[ozbob]

^ I would encourage everyone to attend a session, or the online one.  Have your say!

[James]

BaT is a "world first" because no other city has been stupid enough to build a bus and train tunnel.

^ this.

If we properly designed our bus network a la SEQ Bus Network Review, and made plans to feed pax into rail at Altandi, there would be no need at all for new bus infrastructure at all. There is already plenty of room in existing infrastructure - I put together a pie chart of the share each 'series' of bus routes has in the Cultural Centre between 7:30am and 8:30am. Just by removing the 300/400 series routes from CC, you can decrease the number of services running through it by 14%.

Feeding 13x/14x/15x passengers to rail will decrease the number of buses running through CC by a further 12%. Feeding 10x/11x services to rail/running via CCB/cutting them would free a further 9% of capacity, and if one was desperate for capacity, another 9% could be freed by not running 19x series routes via the Cultural Centre (not to mention holding up traffic less by having one less change of lights). All up, it is possible to almost halve the number of buses running through CC simply by consolidating services and feeding buses to train stations.



There is no need for a bus tunnel, yet alone a need for a goofy tunnel which follows a bus alignment which does not fit with the current network.

[ozbob]

This ..

November 19, 2013 Natalie Bochenski

Brisbanetimes --> Bus and rail tunnel all show and no substance: transport expert

A mass transit specialist claims the Brisbane Underground Bus and Rail tunnel is a political stunt that relies on old thinking about transport planning.

The state government announced the $5 billion UBAT project as its replacement for Labor's Cross River Rail scheme on Sunday.

The 15-metre wide double-decker tunnel will feed both buses and trains from Dutton Park in the south to Victoria Park in the north.

Chris Hale, from the University of Melbourne's Infrastructure Engineering department, said the government had not followed mainstream transport planning processes when developing the idea.

"They've just come up with a stunt, an idea that looks really flashy and exciting," he said.

"However, on any basic transport planning process you would see that bus lanes are the way to go, and high capacity rail for the main moving people path."

The UBAT system will be in operation from 2021, three years after the Cross River Rail scheme was scheduled to open.

Dr Hale, who consulted on an early draft of the CRR but has no ongoing relationship with the Transport Department, said it was a waste to put bus lanes inside a tunnel, particularly with trains operating in the same corridor.

He said one train alone could move 900 to 1000 people, whereas 12 to 15 buses would be needed to move the same number, each with the cost of a driver.

"The crux question is – do the benefits of adding that small amount of people movement capability from buses [to the tunnel] outweigh the very significant additional cost that's going to involve?" he said.

"And it just can't, the maths cannot stack up."

Dr Hale said state and local governments were hanging onto bus dependency thinking initiated by Labor governments in the mid-1990s, rather than embracing a paradigm shift to rail.

"Brisbane needs to draw that line now," he said.

Dr Hale said authorities could reduce bus congestion immediately by introducing dedicated bus lanes on three to five major arterial roads into the city.

"It could be done essentially for nothing, with a bit of red paint and some law enforcement," he said.

"If you have the four or five bus corridors that are entering the city from those different angles, accommodated in a bus lane, by definition you're not going to need a tunnel."

He said the city had experimented with bus lanes but in contrast to other centres around the world, it was closing rather than expanding them.

"One year we take away a bus lane on Coronation Drive, and the next year we say we're going to have to build a tunnel under the river at a cost of billions of dollars, because we have a problem getting buses in and out of the city," he said.

"This is why it becomes ridiculous."

Dr Hale said politics were behind the UBAT, with the Newman government not wanting to accept the basic good tenents of the Cross River Rail scheme.

"Brisbane's always thrashing around and always coming up with these strange ideas and stunts and this bus doctrine that no one else in the world really follows, at least not in the developed world," he said.

"It's time to move beyond that immaturity for Brisbane and start grappling with real genuine mass transit and transport planning."

Dr Hale suggested the German city of Munich as an example for Brisbane to follow, given its similar population and position near several satellite cities.

"The inner and middle suburbs are all effectively and comprehensively covered by rail, trams and buses," he said.

"They build BMWs in Munich, they've got a car culture, they've got a comprehensive road system but still a very high usage of public transport."

Read more: http://www.brisbanetimes.com.au/queensland/bus-and-rail-tunnel-all-show-and-no-substance-transport-expert-20131118-2xrab.html

[ozbob]

I am still not convinced that BaT will actually be built, particularly as proposed.  Once the proper transport planning procedures and analyses are applied surely the true mediocrity will be exposed, as Hale indicates ^.

Postpone BaT and invest in existing infrastructure with decent services, assets, and proper network design. 

[ozbob]

Here is a wild speculation ... zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz

Timmy is out on a ' sell the family jewels sale ' tour state-wide,  ostensibly to fund infrastructure etc.

LNP go early for the election October 2014.  Using the election campaign for asset sales agenda etc.  A key one being BaT (with vague committments from Tones et al.)

BUT they don't win.

Labor with a hotch potch of minors actually get a majority ...

BaT is sent to the bottom of the Brisbane River.  The new Government suddenly finds the courage to implement the bus network changes for BT that should have been done in 2013, and re-instates bus priority.  The urgent need for the ' bus tunnel ' disappears.  Cross River Rail reappears.

Tony Abbott et al continue to misjudge things.  They eventually are forced into a double dissolution.  They get thrashed, either then or in the next fed election.

IA is back, funding projects on merit not political whims.  Hello, can I get an invite to the CRR sod turning please?   

[CRR has had many years of exhaustive work up, contrast that to BaT -  a fairly recent thought bubble of sorts ..]



"WAKE UP BOB! " 

===================

Oh must have been dreaming ...

[ozbob]

... Dr Hale said politics were behind the UBAT, with the Newman government not wanting to accept the basic good tenents of the Cross River Rail scheme.

"Brisbane's always thrashing around and always coming up with these strange ideas and stunts and this bus doctrine that no one else in the world really follows, at least not in the developed world," he said.

"It's time to move beyond that immaturity for Brisbane and start grappling with real genuine mass transit and transport planning." ...

Indeed ...

[Stillwater]

The buses were added to the rail tunnel concept after Tony Abbott got elected and said the feds would not fund urban rail.  Queensland had to find a way to stick the feds for part of the cost.  Feds fund roads, so just add roads that take buses.  Keep the price below the $5 billion mark and hope and pray that a big Armourguard van drives from Canberra with $2 billion on board.

I think it is as crude as that.

The BaT is substantially different from the 'shovel ready' CRR, so a new business case is required, which most probably will expose the flaws.

In any event, the LNP just wants to go to the next election saying they have paid down Labor's big bad debt and with a sod-turning ceremony in mind - just the sod-turning ceremony.  The prize is not PT transport efficiency -- it is another 3 years in power across Queensland.  By then, Boy Scouts might be in trouble for wearing uniforms, patches and insignia.

[ozbob]

Pigs can fly, why not dragons?

[Stillwater]

Well, I am starting to get depressed.  When governments these days say something will happen in 2040, the probability is that it won't happen until 2045.  So, what the governments are really saying is they want me to die before they build stuff!  :conf