Infrastructure Australia want worse road congestion before better public transport?

The Canberra Times are running an article titled "Canberra light rail plan: 'Not enough traffic' says Infrastructure Australia report" which, if accurate, contends that Canberra must have worse road congestion before it can receive funding to improve its public transport infrastructure.

The Infrastructure Australia view that Canberra's road congestion must become worse, before public transport improvement is warranted, is extremely disappointing. Canberra already has a declining rate of bus based public transport patronage and the introduction of light rail is the modal shift required to encourage drivers to use public transport for trips to work, ahead of their private car.

By focussing solely on one aspect - road congestion - Infrastructure Australia overlook the other compelling factors which make Capital Metro so important.

• Unlike buses, light rail will be able to cope with the patronage increases that urban redevelopment along Northbourne Avenue will allow. 
• Further transit oriented development will not only contribute to treasury coffers, but also alleviate urban sprawl. 
• Gungahlin residents will have an alternative to a slow road journey and a battle for limited parking in Civic and the Parliamentary Triangle. 
• Shifting commuters from road to light rail will alleviate road congestion significantly on Northbourne Avenue and decrease rat running in adjacent areas. 
• The cost benefit analysis of Capital Metro shows that for every dollar invested in light rail, two dollars thirty will be returned to the territory. 

ACT Light Rail are disappointed in this recent report from Infrastructure Australia. We feel that building for the future is essential in planning transport infrastructure. Capital Metro from Civic to Gungahlin will underpin a public transport renaissance in Canberra, and ACT Light Rail urge the ACT Government to work with Infrastructure Australia to progress the project.

The ACT is an entity with a four billion dollar economy and growing. While it would be sound for the federal government to provide funding for Canberra's public transport future, if necessary, the ACT Government could come up with a funding model that did not rely upon federal funds.

The projected construction cost of 600 million dollars over four years is roughly the same amount of money spent on Gungahlin roads in the same period, so the ability to build this ourselves is already there. All it requires is political will


Keep up to date on Canberra light rail developments on our facebook page. 

Alistair Coe on the wrong track

The role of an Opposition is to hold an elected government to account for actions and to propose alternate policies, basically to offer an alternative to the government of the day. Alistair Coe is a very intelligent and hard working MLA, so it is difficult to understand his latest press release opposing the Capital Metro project.

GOVERNMENT IRRESPONSIBLE ABOUT LIGHT RAIL

The document which the ACT Government is using as the basis of their decision to build light rail does not provide the substance required to justify the project, said ACT Shadow Minister for Transport, Alistair Coe.

“The Government’s decision making process for light rail has been irresponsible at best, negligent at worst,” said Mr Coe.

“The Government claims to have based its decision to construct light rail on a Concept Report produced last year.

“However, the Concept Report is very light on details and by no means comprehensive enough to justify spending ‘$700 - $860 million’ on light rail.

“The Government is treating the Concept Report as a ‘tick of approval’ for light rail.

“However, even the report’s assessment of light rail is ‘…there is no benefit or harm.’ (URS Australia, page 30)

“If the Government has based their decision to build light rail on this report, then taxpayers should be very concerned.

“The Government should release the scope of the report given to the authors and any other documents used to influence their decision to spend so much money on light rail,” concluded Mr Coe.

 
ACT Light Rail will now examine these statements, a line at a time.  

“The Government’s decision making process for light rail has been irresponsible at best, negligent at worst,” said Mr Coe.

The decision making process was incredibly slow. It took over a decade. The government has arrived at its decision after three failed public transport policies based on improving ACTION Buses so that patronage would reverse its decline. Admitting a need for modal change was a big policy shift.

“The Government claims to have based its decision to construct light rail on a Concept Report produced last year. 
 
The URS report was a concept report, but it was the last of several contemporary reports, including the PWC report into a Canberra wide light rail project. These reports all recommend light rail, as it enhances public transport patronage, reduces road congestion and will raise productivity in the ACT.

 “However, the Concept Report is very light on details and by no means comprehensive enough to justify spending ‘$700 - $860 million’ on light rail.

The concept report offered several alternatives for the corridor. An engineering study has been completed which the government has now based a budget on. A figure of 600 million, not the figure used in the press release.

“The Government is treating the Concept Report as a ‘tick of approval’ for light rail. 

It is not what the decision was based on. The decision was based on economic, social and political factors.  The ALP/Greens agreement to govern, is the approval required for the project to proceed.

“However, even the report’s assessment of light rail is ‘…there is no benefit or harm.’ (URS Australia, page 30)
“If the Government has based their decision to build light rail on this report, then taxpayers should be very concerned. 

The URS report also said that 'Light rail transit generates the best overall outcome for Canberra'. Taxpayers should be concerned at the Governments ability to deliver the project on budget and on time, as it has a demonstrably poor record in major project delivery. This is where the focus of the Opposition should lie.

“The Government should release the scope of the report given to the authors and any other documents used to influence their decision to spend so much money on light rail,” concluded Mr Coe.

We agree with Alistair on this point. These documents should be made public.

The role of Opposition is demanding and generally Alistair Coe does a very good job. Over the years the ALP Government has a poor record on public transport and major project management, so his concerns are justified. However, continually opposing the Capital Metro project on spurious grounds is not a sustainable strategy. The points in his press release are easily dismissed.

ACT Light Rail would ask the Canberra Liberals "What is your alternative public transport policy?"

Capital Metro cost benefit stacks up

Minister for ESDD Simon Corbell has issued a press release arguing the financial case for light rail. This follows several days of pressure from Canberra Liberals MLA Alistair Coe on the financing model that Capital Metro will use.

The press release is as follows:


Capital Metro cost benefit stacks up

The ACT Government’s Capital Metro light rail project delivers a benefit cost outcome similar to, or better than, other light rail projects that are going ahead around Australia, Minister for the Environment and Sustainable Development, Simon Corbell said today.

“According to Infrastructure Australia’s own costings methodology, the benefit cost ratio for Capital Metro at our medium growth scenario was 2.34; this is similar to, or better than, the benefit cost ratio for other light rail projects going ahead in QLD and NSW,” Mr Corbell said.

“The Gold Coast light rail project, for example, has a benefit cost ratio of 1.63, and Sydney’s Inner West light rail project between Lilyfield and Dulwich Hill is understood to have a benefit cost ratio of 1.0.

“Benefit cost ratio is a key indicator of a project’s viability. A ratio greater than 1 demonstrates that economically, for every dollar spent there is a positive economic return.

“A ratio of 2.34 shows that for every dollar spent, there is a return of just over two dollars.

“It’s also important to note that the Infrastructure Australia report, that Opposition Transport spokesman Alistair Coe keeps referring to, has not ruled out light rail, rather it has named a ‘Canberra Transit Corridor’ as an early stage infrastructure priority (page 100).

“Transforming and integrating the city’s public transport system is a big investment that will deliver benefits to Canberrans, and to the economy, for decades to come,” Mr Corbell said.