From Abbott election speech


Quote:

The WestConnex in Sydney, the East West Link in Melbourne, the Gateway Upgrade here in Brisbane, the North South Road in Adelaide, and the Swan Bypass in Perth will be well and truly underway.

So Abbott wants to built 5 new roads in 6 capital cities. Hobart misses out  :'( Why is that is there not enough cars in Tasmania to built a big new road.

How will the big new roads be better then public transport? Why didn't Abbott promise to put any money into public transport?

Who is the roads going to help the most? How will the roads help people that live in the country? Who will be the main benefactor of the big new roads? If the roads are funded by the federal government will there be a toll on using the roads so we are paying twice to used the road?

With the big new roads getting built, will that put more cars on the road so more petrol would be sold and making the petrol companies more profit?

John S wrote on Apr 2^nd, 2014 at 10:16am:

From Abbott election speech Quote: The WestConnex in Sydney, the East West Link in Melbourne, the Gateway Upgrade here in Brisbane, the North South Road in Adelaide, and the Swan Bypass in Perth will be well and truly underway. So Abbott wants to built 5 new roads in 6 capital cities. Hobart misses out  :'( Why is that is there not enough cars in Tasmania to built a big new road. How will the big new roads be better then public transport? Why didn't Abbott promise to put any money into public transport? Who is the roads going to help the most? How will the roads help people that live in the country? Who will be the main benefactor of the big new roads? If the roads are funded by the federal government will there be a toll on using the roads so we are paying twice to used the road? With the big new roads getting built, will that put more cars on the road so more petrol would be sold and making the petrol companies more profit?

Wheres Canberras funding for light rail. We dont need any new roads here, but love light rail.

Prime Minister for Canyons wrote on Apr 2^nd, 2014 at 10:22am:

Wheres Canberras funding for light rail. We dont need any new roads here, but love light rail.

Light rail is public transport and we know Abbott doesn't believe in public transport, that is why there is no money for it.

How would petrol companies make a profit out of light rail or heavy rail.

Mr Abbott is a jobs and infrastructure PM, leftards. He'll get this country right again.

Safe, reliable, predictable, sane, measured, responsible government, steady as she goes.

Thank heavens the grown-ups are back in charge.

Prime Minister for Canyons wrote on Apr 2^nd, 2014 at 10:22am:

Wheres Canberras funding for light rail. We dont need any new roads here, but love light rail.

Canberra doesn't need light rail and anyway the plan is (apparently) for it to only run from Gungahlin or down Northbourne Avenue, or something. I can think of better things to spend our ACT taxpayer money on. Simon Corbell is an idiot. ::)

http://the-riotact.com/toot-toot-simon-seeking-light-rail-experts/121122

Bugger the roads.

Discourage cars, and promote rail.

Put trains back where they've been withdrawn from service.

Buy a couple of 2nd-hand HS trains from the Japanese and
run them Mel-Can-Syd-Bris and Mel-Adel-Perth.

There's a few thousand jobs, for starters.

Oh! And re-nationalise rail. Privatisation HAS failed.

Neferti wrote on Apr 2^nd, 2014 at 4:22pm:

Prime Minister for Canyons wrote on Apr 2nd, 2014 at 10:22am: Wheres Canberras funding for light rail. We dont need any new roads here, but love light rail. Canberra doesn't need light rail and anyway the plan is (apparently) for it to only run from Gungahlin or down Northbourne Avenue, or something. I can think of better things to spend our ACT taxpayer money on. Simon Corbell is an idiot. ::) http://the-riotact.com/toot-toot-simon-seeking-light-rail-experts/121122

WRONG!

Of course it does.

Has for years.

Kat wrote on Apr 2^nd, 2014 at 4:26pm:

Bugger the roads. Discourage cars, and promote rail. Put trains back where they've been withdrawn from service.

Oh, Mr Abbott will do that, don't you worry.

Sir Clive's put in the application already - a lovely new railway line all the way to his wonderful new Barrier Reef coal port.

That's right, leftards. Australia is open for business again.

Thank heavens the grown-ups are back in charge.

Karnal wrote on Apr 2^nd, 2014 at 4:34pm:

Kat wrote on Apr 2nd, 2014 at 4:26pm: Bugger the roads. Discourage cars, and promote rail. Put trains back where they've been withdrawn from service. Oh, Mr Abbott will do that, don't you worry. Sir Clive's put in the application already - a lovely new railway line all the way to his wonderful new Barrier Reef coal port. That's right, leftards. Australia is open for business again. Thank heavens the grown-ups are back in charge.

Yeas.....and Newmann gave the line to Gina.  Sir Clive is not happy.

Kat wrote on Apr 2^nd, 2014 at 4:32pm:

WRONG! Of course it does. Has for years.

Do you live in Canberra, Max? I gather that you do not! I do and I know we do NOT need light rail from Gungahlin to Civic, a Very Fast Train to Sydney, or a lot of other rubbish the ACT Labor/Green Party wants to spend our hard earned money on.  The Federal Government is only responsible for National Highways, not public transport.

Kat wrote on Apr 2^nd, 2014 at 4:26pm:

Bugger the roads. Discourage cars, and promote rail. Put trains back where they've been withdrawn from service. Buy a couple of 2nd-hand HS trains from the Japanese and run them Mel-Can-Syd-Bris and Mel-Adel-Perth. There's a few thousand jobs, for starters. Oh! And re-nationalise rail. Privatisation HAS failed.

I am guessing you don't own a car or don't know how to drive. Rail goes... not very many places. it doesn't go to my kids school, the shops, work or any of those places.

Aussie wrote on Apr 2^nd, 2014 at 4:40pm:

Karnal wrote on Apr 2nd, 2014 at 4:34pm: Kat wrote on Apr 2nd, 2014 at 4:26pm: Bugger the roads. Discourage cars, and promote rail. Put trains back where they've been withdrawn from service. Oh, Mr Abbott will do that, don't you worry. Sir Clive's put in the application already - a lovely new railway line all the way to his wonderful new Barrier Reef coal port. That's right, leftards. Australia is open for business again. Thank heavens the grown-ups are back in charge. Yeas.....and Newmann gave the line to Gina.  Sir Clive is not happy.

Dame Gina? Well, yes, but that’s a reward for her services to the Australian people.

Sir Clive will get what’s his, Aussie, don’t you worry about that. Mr Abbott is the infrastructure Prime Minister. He’ll build the roads and rail of the 21st century.

You know, like the robber barrons, knights and dames of the 19th century.

What a tall glass of water that man is.

Bread and Butter wrote on Apr 2^nd, 2014 at 5:01pm:

Kat wrote on Apr 2nd, 2014 at 4:26pm: Bugger the roads. Discourage cars, and promote rail. Put trains back where they've been withdrawn from service. Buy a couple of 2nd-hand HS trains from the Japanese and run them Mel-Can-Syd-Bris and Mel-Adel-Perth. There's a few thousand jobs, for starters. Oh! And re-nationalise rail. Privatisation HAS failed. I am guessing you don't own a car or don't know how to drive. Rail goes... not very many places. it doesn't go to my kids school, the shops, work or any of those places.

Who cares? It goes up Gina’s holes.

Your kids’ school, shops and work must have been built before the days of rail, Bread. Too bad.

Lucky they invented the car, eh?

Neferti wrote on Apr 2^nd, 2014 at 4:22pm:

Prime Minister for Canyons wrote on Apr 2nd, 2014 at 10:22am: Wheres Canberras funding for light rail. We dont need any new roads here, but love light rail. Canberra doesn't need light rail and anyway the plan is (apparently) for it to only run from Gungahlin or down Northbourne Avenue, or something. I can think of better things to spend our ACT taxpayer money on. Simon Corbell is an idiot. ::) http://the-riotact.com/toot-toot-simon-seeking-light-rail-experts/121122

Such as? Really our bus system is a joke and the roads need unclogging during peak hour.

Neferti wrote on Apr 2^nd, 2014 at 4:42pm:

Kat wrote on Apr 2nd, 2014 at 4:32pm: WRONG! Of course it does. Has for years. Do you live in Canberra, Max? I gather that you do not! I do and I know we do NOT need light rail from Gungahlin to Civic, a Very Fast Train to Sydney, or a lot of other rubbish the ACT Labor/Green Party wants to spend our hard earned money on.  The Federal Government is only responsible for National Highways, not public transport.

Your background in infrastructure and commercial development as well as your qualifications in regional planning telling you that?

China doesn’t need intercity high-speed rail or 27 brand new metro systems in 6 years, leftards.

Doesn’t stop them doing it though.

As has been pointed out many times when roads are proposed instead of public transport.....Where will people park once they get where they are going.....Large venues need massive parking lots and the cost to motorists is staggering in most cases....Then when the event is over nobody can move for hours.....Public transport moves more people more efficiently and saves on public land that is used as car parks that sit idle for a great deal of the time....Abbott has no idea???

:-? :-? :-?

Bread and Butter wrote on Apr 2^nd, 2014 at 5:01pm:

Kat wrote on Apr 2nd, 2014 at 4:26pm: Bugger the roads. Discourage cars, and promote rail. Put trains back where they've been withdrawn from service. Buy a couple of 2nd-hand HS trains from the Japanese and run them Mel-Can-Syd-Bris and Mel-Adel-Perth. There's a few thousand jobs, for starters. Oh! And re-nationalise rail. Privatisation HAS failed. I am guessing you don't own a car or don't know how to drive. Rail goes... not very many places. it doesn't go to my kids school, the shops, work or any of those places.

And I'm guessing you're an idiot.

If not, you wouldn't have totally missed the point.

And no, I can't be fracked explaining it. Again.

If you haven't grasped it already, there's no point.

When I no longer need to carry equipment on my ute, or deliver  produce I am going to become a whinging whining leftie complaining about too much road funding.

Everybody needs stuff, everybody may need an ambulance.

I can just see the Ambos using public transport instead of driving.

By all means have public transport, but whiney whingey lefties don't want to pay for it.

miketrees wrote on Apr 2^nd, 2014 at 10:25pm:

When I no longer need to carry equipment on my ute, or deliver  produce I am going to become a whinging whining leftie complaining about too much road funding. Everybody needs stuff, everybody may need an ambulance. I can just see the Ambos using public transport instead of driving. By all means have public transport, but whiney whingey lefties don't want to pay for it.

Roads are needed without question and I have no problem funding roads....But when an infrastructure Prime Minister refuses to fund public transport and only fund roads there is a problem with priorities....Public transport helps relieve congestion and provides a valuable service to low income earners the elderly and young people.....Not everyone can afford a vehicle or are old enough to drive but everyone can catch a train.....I have already addressed the parking issue that takes up valuable public space that sits idle a lot of the time.....Build both but do not ignore the needs of those who do not drive!!!

::) ::) ::)

Tony Abbott has shown he does not mind changing his mind. Few commentators have written pieces arguing for the Coalition to pass carbon price legislation; incoming prime minister ''Axe the Tax'' Abbott has.

He has swivelled on paid parental leave and school funding changes. His sister says his views on gay marriage are ''shifting''.

Here is another position Abbott will hopefully discard as retrograde and redundant - his insistence that the federal government should pay for motorways only and not for public transport.

For a party that professes allegiance to free-market principles, the Liberals are curiously insensitive to market demand for transport.

The ''market'' - in this instance, moving people around - is clear. Commuters are trying to avoid using a car if they can help it. Saturday's Herald report documented a steep rise in public transport use in Sydney, along with a slump in the rate of growth of car use. In the past decade, car use in Sydney rose by half the rate of population growth. Trips by train increased by twice the rate of population growth.

The trend is more pronounced among younger people. Inner west residents in their 20s are twice as likely to catch a train on an average weekday than was the case a decade ago. So, too, are twentysomethings living in St George or Sutherland or Fairfield or Liverpool. The trend is not confined to the inner city.

A week before the election, I interviewed Wentworth Liberal MP Malcolm Turnbull, in an attempt to add to the subgenre of political stories like "Turnbull disagrees with Abbott on issue X."

Turnbull is a public transport enthusiast. He tweets on the bus; he compliments NSW Transport Minister Gladys Berejiklian when the trains run on time.

So, what did he think about Abbott's position that urban public transport funding was not in the federal government's "knitting"?

''I'm a great believer in mass transit,'' Turnbull said. ''I think that as our cities become larger and denser we are going to make more and more investments in mass transit.''

But Turnbull would not be drawn on whether or not he disagreed with Abbott. Instead, he laid out the intellectual justification for keeping Canberra out of public transport funding (though he did not say if he agreed with this justification).

''The argument against the Commonwealth government getting involved is one related to governance,'' Turnbull said.

The thinking goes like this: public transport systems have large and unwieldy bureaucracies.

If the federal government starts paying for railway lines and bus networks, states would lose the incentive to try to make these bureaucracies more efficient and just keeping asking Canberra for handouts, the argument goes. This is the intellectual rationale for Abbott's refusal to spend money on railways or buses, and why his government is scrapping about $700 million slated for train lines in Melbourne, Brisbane and Perth in favour of fast-tracked spending on motorways, such as $1.5 billion for WestConnex.

Is it a good rationale? Well, if it is a good argument for not investing in public transport, it is probably also a good one for cancelling federal funding for schools and hospitals, and Abbott is not promising to do that.

There is no doubt Sydney needs better roads, but no government can transform the city's public transport system into one like Paris' or Zurich's.

However, the kind of muscular individualism that suggests road funding is good and public transport funding is an indulgence just does not fit with the type of city Sydney is becoming.

Anecdotally, and in NSW Bureau of Transport Statistics' surveys, the reasons Sydney commuters cite for shifting to public transport tend to relate to the spatial difficulties of driving, parking and maintaining a car.

Cars are great but they can be a headache, too. In a city that does not have a lot of room left, it is a lot easier to slip a bus ticket into your wallet than find a parking place.

People are not making these decisions on environmental grounds; they are making them because they are trying to save themselves time and hassle.
It is to Labor's discredit that the debate about federal funding for public transport is largely academic at present.

Anthony Albanese, who is contesting the federal Labor leadership on a "nation-building" platform, never managed to successfully fund a public transport project in Sydney in his six years as transport minister, despite pitching a last-minute promise of a Parramatta to Epping train service before the 2010 election.

However, just because Labor did not fare well in public transport policy does not mean the incoming federal government should rule out public transport funding.
If it is ruled out, Abbott's "roads of the 21st century" will inevitably become clogged without better alternative transport, and those of us who have used exemplary public transport systems overseas will continue to return home thinking, demanding and lamenting: why can't we have that?

Jacob Saulwick is the Herald's transport reporter.


Read more: http://www.smh.com.au/comment/the-data-that-proves-tony-abbott-should-change-his-mind-on-public-transport-20130915-2tsrk.html#ixzz2xlj3BuHT

Bread and Butter wrote on Apr 2^nd, 2014 at 5:01pm:

Rail goes... not very many places. it doesn't go to my kids school, the shops, work or any of those places.

I am guessing you don't use public transport much.

Of course rail doesn't take you to your kids' school or to your local shops - or possibly to work, depending on where you work.  Short local trips are what you would use buses or light rail for.  Trains connect suburbs, towns and cities - they don't take you down to your local fruit shop.

Rail does go to quite a lot of places.  When was the last time you caught a train?

miketrees wrote on Apr 2^nd, 2014 at 10:25pm:

When I no longer need to carry equipment on my ute, or deliver  produce I am going to become a whinging whining leftie complaining about too much road funding. Everybody needs stuff, everybody may need an ambulance. I can just see the Ambos using public transport instead of driving. By all means have public transport, but whiney whingey lefties don't want to pay for it.

Weird representation of the left position. Its usually the right who as a whole refuse to want to pay for public transport.

Weird representation of the left position. Its usually the right who as a whole refuse to want to pay for public transport.

Try putting up the price of public transport and see who whinges then.

Public transport is not free, it has to be paid for by some one.