Living through the COVID-19 pandemic and opportunities for a new and better future

Living through the COVID-19 pandemic 

The worldwide COVID-19 pandemic has caused major disruption for life as we know it.  In no particular order:

Economies have slowed drastically due to restrictions on many businesses operating.

Many people have lost their jobs and are now unemployed.  Unemployment is reaching levels not seen since the 1930 depression.

Many shops cannot pay rents as they have no income while they are shut down.

Many housing tenants cannot pay rent as they have no income.

Governments have provided stimulatory spending including providing wage replacements to those who have been stood down by companies due to lack of work.  Some groups of people are not getting payments, including international students and casual workers who have been employed with a company for less than a year.

Social distancing to reduce the spread of infection has halted many social conventions including hugs, kisses and handshakes.

Social distancing has also been introduced in supermarkets and retail shops that remain open.

Panic buying has seen supplies of toilet paper and many food supplies depleted.

Many school and all university students are being schooled from home via the Internet.

People are walking and cycling in local parks either alone, with another person or with a family group from the same household.

People are heeding government advice to stay at home and avoid unnecessary travel.  The roads are very quiet.

Police are fining some people who break social distancing and other regulations imposed under a state of emergency.

Many people are working from home via the Internet.

The arts and music industries have ground to a halt with all public performances and exhibitions closed.

Sports are stopped and many sporting clubs and organisations are suffering cash flow problems. Some say they won't survive.

The stock market has suffered major losses with share prices falling [link]

Countries have closed their borders to most travel.

People on cruise ships have become marooned when no country will allow them to berth due to concerns about infection risk.

Air pollution has dropped along with automobile and industry emissions.

Families are spending time together with parents and children all at home during lockdowns.

People are cooking more - meals, bread, pastries, cakes etc.

Hand washing has become routine, along with disinfectant hand cleaner in some shops.

A National Cabinet has been formed to expedite decision making and align federal and state policies and actions for the COVID-19 pandemic.

Union leaders are talking to federal government ministers to develop appropriate support measures for companies and employees.

Companies with large debts and/or "just in time" manufacturing/retail models have been hit hard by the lockdowns imposed by governments.  Many, such as Virgin Australia, are in big trouble.  Some will fail.

Opportunities for a new and better future

Individuals, societies and governments can change how things are done when they want or need to.

We can pay a universal basic income to people who are unemployed.

Governments can build infrastructure that generates employment and benefits people including:

• High quality bike paths, free from traffic
• High speed rail links between cities
• More public transport to give people the option for convenient and sustainable travel

Provide a universal public health system that delivers health services for all citizens and provides economies of scale.

Provide more government funding for research and development into various sectors including:

• Public health and disease prevention
• Renewable energy and energy storage solutions
• Rebuilding centralised electricity grids to support micro-grids, distributed storage and distribution of renewable energy

Impose a travel tax on all car and truck travel.

• Car users and trucks don't directly pay for roads so many people feel they are free to use.  However, increased road usage creates more demands for roads, creating a vicious cycle.

Support work from home as an ongoing arrangement

• Less travel would free up a lot of time for many people
• People could work from home, possibly on a roster system, for 1 to 5 days per week

Price air travel appropriately.

• Excessive air travel is a luxury the planet cannot afford.  It should be priced to cover greenhouse gas emissions, leading to reductions in non-essential trips.
• Local holidays are a more sustainable option

Protect forests and plant trees

• Forest provide natural resources and are "services" such as producing water and drawing down CO2.  They also provide habitat for animals and plants and support biodiversity
• Cease logging of native forests  
• Plant trees on degraded farm land and public land to generate employment and increase the world's forest cover.

Transition to renewable energy

• Develop are roadmap to transition to 100% renewable energy by 2030 and transition off fossil fuels including oil, gas and coal.
• Generate employment in manufacturing and services for renewable energy

Make all elected MPs part of government

• Reform politics and government so that all elected MPs have a role to play
• Ditch political parties and "the opposition"

Feel free to add any suggestions in the comments.

2014 Victorian state election priority issues

Here is my list of priority issues for the 2014 Victorian state election

Transport

• The East West Link tunnel road project should not proceed.
• Public transport network plans for 2014-2020
• Funds allocated to building a safe and comprehensive cycling network segregated from cars - 
• Cycling network plans for 2014-2020 - aiming to provide a connected safe bike route to within 5km of every Melbourne resident.

Environment

• Logging in Victoria's native forests should cease.
• The Great Forest National Park to be proclaimed.
• A complete overhaul of our train network - and new lines built to the airport, Rowville and Doncaster

Education

• State secondary school system needs more resources and funds.

Housing

• 7 star efficiency rating for buildings - commercial and residences

Energy

• Energy plan to increase renewable energy production to 80% of total demand by 2020, including investment is solar and wind power and local energy storage capacity

Lies and deception: The East West Tunnel won't reduce congestion

When Denis Napthine took over from Ted Baillieu as Premier of Victoria in March 2013 he took charge of government that many thought had lost its way.

Napthine set about creating a new "firm leadership" persona to distance himself from his predecessor.  Undoubtedly he was also influenced by Liberal Party strategists working on the campaign for the Liberal-National coalition government to be re-elected in 2014.

Unfortunately, after policy announcements during the 2012 Victorian election campaign about providing better public transport, including studies for Doncaster and Melbourne Airport railway lines, Denis Napthine recommitted the government to building the "East West Link" in two stages.

Source: Prof Graham Currie (PDF)

Stage 1 (committed)

• Part 1: a 4 to 6 km road tunnel to connect the Eastern Freeway in Collingwood to the City Link Tollway in Parkville ($6 to $8 billion)
• Part 2. a connection south to Footscray Road and the Port of Melbourne

Stage 2 (2014 election pledge)

• Connection to Western Metropolitan Ring Rd

The total cost of both stages is estimated at $15 to $17 billion.

The reasons provided by the Napthine Government for the east west tunnel are that it will:

• Cut congestion
• Slash travel times
• Drive growth
• Create jobs

Unfortunately, the first two of these are falsehoods and the second two are highly questionable.

1. Cutting congestion

Transport studies have shown that 95% of traffic travelling in on the Eastern Freeway is destined to a location other than along the route of the proposed tunnel.  This traffic is destined to the Melbourne CBD or to the south of Melbourne.  Much of this traffic exits onto Hoddle Street which turns into Punt Road.  This route is frequently gridlocked by very heavy traffic, which also impedes the passage of public transport buses.

Source: Prof Graham Currie (PDF)

The Napthine Government is advertising their East West Link on billboards positioned along Punt Road and stating that congestion will be reduced and car commuter travel times will decrease.

While the Trains Not Tollroads campaign also has billboards along Punt Road challenging these claims.

It is quite clear that the proposed East West Tunnel would do nothing to reduce congestion on Hoddle Street, Punt Road, Nicholson Street, Brunswick Street and other inner Melbourne car commuter routes.

2. Reducing travel times

"Reduced travel time" is the main benefit that Napthine Government claims the East West Tunnell will provide.  However, as the vast majority of traffic coming in on the Eastern Freeway will still have to queue to get out tunnel exits onto inner Melbourne car commuter routes, cars will bring tunnel traffic (3 lanes each way) to a stand still.  The long "tailback" of cars on the Eastern Freeway will still occur.

Building more road infrastructure, and not providing fast and effective public transport options, will encourage more people to commute in their cars.  The minor increase in road capacity provided by the East West tunnel will be simply swamped by additional car users.  There is clear evidence of this on the Monash Tollway and City Link tunnels under the Yarra River.  These are brought to a standstill nearly every morning by heavy commuter traffic.

The proposed East West Tunnel will do nothing to reduce travel times for people driving in along the Eastern Freeway.  

3. Driving growth

A lot of public money will be spent on the East West Road Tunnel/Link if it proceeds.  The assumption that "economic growth will result" is predicated on the project actually reducing congestion and improving transport of people and goods.  

As congestion won't reduce and transport times won't improve, the project won't drive growth.

Economic growth resulting from spending the money would be equivalent if it were spent on rail projects such as the Doncaster rail line.

4. Creating jobs

This is a furphy. 

The project would create jobs during design and construction, but no more jobs than building new railway lines would create.

Other impacts
Other impacts that the East West Link project will have include:

• Rat running: A toll road inevitably results in toll avoidance which will lead to rat-running in local suburbs including Collingwood, Fitzroy, Parkville, Flemington, Ascot Vale and Moonee Ponds.
• Connectivity for pedestrians and cyclists will be seriously impeded by the environment created by flyovers, and increased number of traffic lanes at Hoddle St and Flemington Road.
• Liveability: The increased space and priority devoted in this project to motor vehicle traffic is contrary to sustainable transport practices and the direction of most modern cities across the world including Los Angeles, Washingon D.C. and Naples. A liveable city prioritises investment in public transport, not tollways in the middle of the city.
• Impacts on residences close to proposed flyovers and new freeway routes, with greatly reduced amenity and without compensation have not been addressed.
• Historic shot tower: The view and prominence of the historic shot tower on Alexandra Parade will be impeded by a flyover.
• Increased noise: Adding two lanes to the existing Eastern Freeway from Hoddle Street to Tram Road will increase traffic and associated noise.
• Royal Park degradation: The large scale removal of mature trees and the removal of wetlands and open space in Park Royal are unacceptable in terms of native vegetation, habitat and biodiversity loss. The loss of sports grounds and recreational space will have a negative impact on community health and well being.
• The visual impact of widened roads, tunnel exits and flyovers on Park Royal is unacceptable.
• Climate change. The toll road will encourage increased car use and therefore increase pollution and contribute to global warming.

Why the Napthine Government is so committed to the East West Tunnel

With no real benefits, massive expenditure and no confirmed "business case" I speculate on the motives of the Napthine Government.

The project, if it proceeds, will also have huge negative impacts on Melbourne, including:

• Destruction of large parts of Royal Park
• Demolition of a lot of residential housing
• Increased traffic flows on already busy inner Melbourne transit roads
• Increased greenhouse gas emissions through increased use of motor vehicles for commuter trips
• Increased requirements for parking throughout Melbourne's inner suburbs and CBD

I think the project has been promoted to and targeted to people who already commute by car from Melbourne's outer eastern and south eastern suburbs, including Franskton and beyond.  There are several marginal seats in this area.  If the Napthine Government can convince enough people that there transit times will reduce (even though they won't) then they think have an election winner.

The people who live in inner Melbourne suburbs and electorates such as Northcote, Richmond, Melbourne and Brunswick have been written off by the Napthine Government as they live in Labor-Green seats that the Liberals will not win.  Resident's lifestyles, life quality and air quality will be just collateral damage to the Napthine government.

One possible reason that the "business case" for the proposed East West Tunnel has not been released is that it would not withstand scrutiny.

The Napthine government is placing full page advertisements in newspapers to "sell the benefits" of the East West tunnel.  Unfortunately, they are just pedaling lies.

Building a road tunnel that will become an $8 billion underground car park is a very expensive election stunt.

Solutions

The Victorian Auditor-General’s Office reported recently that in Victoria there is:

• Longstanding failure to deliver infrastructure and services needed in growth areas
• No clear plan for managing traffic congestion and travel demand
• Weak capability to manage public transport growth and performance
• Total cost of all infrastructure needed in greenfields over next 30 years is $36 billion

Clearly, there is a need to improve planning and decision-making for the delivery of improved public transport infrastructure and services 

If new railways were built road traffic would reduce. Many people would "mode shift" from road to rail. One train line can carry the same amount of people as 20 lanes of roads.  This would reduce congestion and improve travel times for those who still choose to commute in their cars.

Safe cycle paths separated from cars would encourage more people to "mode shift" from cars to bicycles for commuting.

A congestion tax levied on people commuting in cars to inner Melbourne and the CBD would reduce traffic and ease congestion.  This would also free up road space for freight transport that cannot be conveyed by rail.

A referendum on the East West Tunnel vs Doncaster Rail would allow Victorians to vote on what they think the best project is.  That would be true democracy.  

What can you do? 

Consider writing a letter to your local state Members of Parliament (upper and lower houses), the Premier Dennis Napthine and Transport Minister Terry Mulder.

You can also make a submission to the East West Link Comprehensive Impact Statement.

Will sanity prevail?

The Labor government notionally opposes the East West Tunnel, but will most likely continue with the project if they win the next state election.

Victorian politicians have demonstrated that they are incapable of making appropriate, well consider decisions on providing transport infrastructure.  We need a mechanism to separate these major decisions from political interference and election campaigning.

Efficient and sustainable transport solutions will only occur if enough people apply political pressure to both the Liberal/National and Labor political parties.

References

• East West Link, Melbourne - Wikipedia 
• East West Link - Linking Melbourne Authority 
• Download CIS documents - Linking Melbourne Authority
State of Transport forum at the Melbourne Town Hall Forum papers, including presentations from Victorian Auditor General's Office and Professor Graham Currie
• Tunnel is right, says transport tsar

• 'Optimism bias' on toll road plan
• Sale of port would fund Labor's transport scheme 
• Traffic forecast at odds with decline
• Residents in line of tunnel weigh up impact on health
• East-west link will drive Melbourne renewal 
• East west link to have major impact on communities 
• State government announces new off-ramp for east-west link 
• Secret case for link revealed 
• It's a case of cars and effect, and experts warn it can't go on
• Transparency urged for key transport projects 
• Secret report on east-west link reveals traffic explosion 

List of East West Tunnel articles

Napthine Government plans $8b underground carpark

Denis Napthine, Michael O'Brien and the Liberal government have just made a disastrous and very expensive mistake.

They announced that their priority "transport" project for Melbourne was to spend $8b digging a tunnel to connect the Eastern Freeway with the Tullamarine Freeway.

After 80 years for constructing hundreds of kilometres of high volume roads (freeways and tollways) across Victoria and into Melbourne, we still have chronic congestion.

During this period:

• no new passenger railway lines have been constructed in Melbourne since the Glen Waverley line was built in 1930.  
• Melbourne has grown from a city of 1 million to nearly 5 million in 2013.

Denis Napthine (Premier), Michael O'Brien (Treasurer) and Terry Mulder (Transport Minister) don't seem to realise that cars and roads cannot provided a workable mass transport system.  A visit to Los Angeles proves this beyond doubt.  They are now building a metro rail network in that big city.

Simple mathematics eludes our politicians:

• One train of 8 carriages can carry 1000 people.  A train line can move 50,000 people an hour.
• One freeway/tollway lane can move 2,500 people an hour.
• Four freeway/tollway lanes can move 10,000 people an hour.
• One train line moves the same number of people as twenty freeway lanes

The RACV have gleefully announced that the Napthine Government is "investing in critical transport infrastructure".  It is clear that their lobbying has been very effective, as always.

Michael O'Brien said "this is nation-building infrastructure - just look at CityLink".  O'Brien obviously hasn't looked at the stationary cars and trucks on City Link trying to get through the Burnley Tunnel, or the traffic jams on every major "freeway/tollway" the commuters try to use to get to Melbourne.

Denis Napthine has challenged the Federal Labor government to provide funds for this project, even though there is no business case for it.  Tony Abbot has announced he will commit $1.5b to the project if he becomes prime minister.

Foolish politics politics is condemning Melbourne to ongoing chronic traffic congestion and providing people with no viable transport alternative.

These people also don't seem to understand that the destination of over 90% of the people driving on the Eastern Freeway is inner Melbourne so they won't benefit from a tunnel link to the Tullamarine Freeway/Tollway.

If this "East-West tunnel" is built it too will block up with cars and become the world's most expensive underground car park.

The Melbourne Metro Rail Tunnel is a rail project that formed out of recommendations in the Eddington Report.  The Napthine Government has only funded ongoing "planning" for this.  The Federal Labor Government has allocated $3 billion to this project, contingent on the Napthine Government also allocating $3 billion, which they have refused to do.  Tony Abbott has also ruled out providing funding for the rail project.

However, I am not convinced that the Melbourne Metro Rail Tunnel - that would provide an underground rail line from Foostcray to Caulfield - is the best rail option for Melbourne.  The authors of the Eddington Report, including Peter Newman, claim this project is "required to increase capacity in the existing rail network to allow new suburban rail lines to be built".  But they did not do an holistic study of Melbourne's rail network - their brief was only to assess "east west transport needs".

Personally, I think we need, in priority order the:

1. Rowville line, also connecting Monash University.  Shuttle service to the Dandenong line with a people interchange
2. Doncaster line, connecting near Clifton Hill
3. Melbourne Airport line, connecting Melbourne Airport to Southern Cross station
4. Melbourne outer loop underground - a circle line connecting South Melbourne, South Yarra, Richmond, Fitzroy, Carlton, Melbourne University, Docklands and Southern Cross.

Unfortunately, all we will get for the coming decades are more clogged roads that will become underground car parks.

Golding, The Age

Links

• Rail or road? Napthine takes us down the wrong route, The Age
• Tunnel won't fix traffic woes, The Age 

Signs of Myki failing - don't tap, wave or swipe

Photos taken at Flinders Street station provide more evidence that the Myki system is a failure.

Don't wave, don't swipe, don't tap!

Touch and hold but then wait for 1 second or more!

When that doesn't work, step out of the queue and talk to the gate attendant. When this happened to me last week, I was informed that "there is a software bug that causes the reader to go to sleep for your card, step out of the queue, let someone else through, then try again"


See also: Huge demand for public transport in Melbourne and poor service

Huge demand for public transport in Melbourne and poor service

I have started work again in Melbourne's CBD.  The trains during "peak hours" are much busier than when I previously commuted regularly about 6 months ago.  It is great to see so many people using public transport, but the system is performing poorly.

The "stopping all station" trains along the Box Hill line used to go direct to Flinders Street, now all trains on the line go through the loop.  There are hundreds of people swapping trains (from Loop train to Flinder St and vice versa) for every train that arrives at Richmond.  This delays trains departing and obviously inconveniences many people.  There has to be a better way.

The Myki ticketing system is a debacle.  After costing around $1.2b (way over budget), and possibly up to $1.5b, it has critical performance issues that are impacting commuters, lots of bugs in the billing, and serious problems with the card readers.  The review commissioned by the Baillieu government has not been made public, but they have decided to throw good money after bad and try and make it work.

They are now decommissioning the Metcard readers and many stations and forcing commuters to use Myki, so the real issues and failings are becoming very obvious.

Here is a summary of issues I have encountered:

• Some card readers don't read my card, but the one next to it does (malfunction, slows passengers)
• I was charged a Zone 1-2 trip even though I only travelled in Zone 1 (I got a refund)
• I was charged a penalty fare for "not touching off" at Surrey Hills, when I carefully did.  I contacted the Myki Call Centre - they told me a faulty reader had immediately touched me on (twice!) when I touched off at it (I got a refund).
• The Myki Call Centre cannot see transactions for the current day and they are not visible via the Myki website.  You have to wait for an overnight computer batch run to see them!
• The refunds did not appear in my account.  The Call Centre informed me that "they send the refund to every card reader in the system (store and forward!?) because they don't know where I will touch on.  When I touch on I then get the credit.  So it seems the card stores the value, not they central system.  If this is true it is a bizarre and very complex IT architecture.
• The card readers are far too slow.  Huge queues form at all exits of busy stations such as Flinders Street and Southern Cross while everyone waits around 1 second (or more) for the device to touch off.  This should take milliseconds.  The sensitivity of the card readers and the response time is woeful.
• The system would not have passed basic performance and load testing (if this was done) and is now failing user acceptance testing.
• The cause of the very slow response of the card readers is not certain.  They may be just substandard, or the network latency might be causing it.  There is also a "rumour" that the sensitivity of the readers has been "turned down" to get them to work in close proximity with the existing Metcard readers.  There may  be some validity to this as it has been announced that many of the Metcard/Myki readers and gates are about to be replaced by new gates with Myki readers only.  This will be very expensive. If it fixes the poor read response and high bad read problems, this should have been done BEFORE commuters were forced to use the Myki system
• There is still no Myki solution for tourists or country people who visit Melbourne.  This is a basic requirement that should have been met BEFORE any roll out.

So how did this disaster happen?  It seems that Transport Minister Peter Batchelor in the previous Labor Government decided they would "develop a world class ticketing system that they could sell all around the world" and ignored the option of buying a system that was already available and working well (such as Brisbane's, or London's Oyster Card or Hong Kong's Octupus card).  

Then the government awarded the contract to the lowest tender and the Kamco consortium that knew very little about ticketing systems. 

Then Kamco bought cheap and inferior "end of life" reading devices and designed a system that has serious architectural points of failure.

Many of the problems with Myki were evident over a year ago, as I wrote in this post about Myki in February 2010.  I still think that the Myki experiment should be canned.  We should start again with a system that is proven and works, or stop issuing tickets or employ conductors again.  Governments should not engage in research and development for this type of infrastructure.  They should select systems that are proven, and conduct due diligence on companies and consortiums before awarding them contracts.   

There is a whiff about this whole debacle that I just don't like. 

Let's have the "open and transparent government" that you promised Premier Baillieu.  Please release the Myki review report, and tell me which of the issues I list are fixable.

To top matters off, the Auditor general calls for annual spending of $3 billion to cope with growing demand and fix problems due to chronic under funding.  Then Ian Dobbs, the new head of newly formed Public Transport Victoria, rejects the call for $30 billion and states that "The biggest opportunities are in making best use of what we've got at the moment, rather than believing that all the solutions are building, or buying new kit".

He, and members of our government, have obviously not traveled by public transport recently.  They probably never do.

I am riding by bike to and from work.  It is faster, more reliable and much more pleasant, even taking into account the traffic I have to negotiate.

Links

• Suburbs hit by myki crush
• New transport boss rejects call for $30bn overhaul 
• Changes fail to fix train crush
• Public transport needs billions 
• Many trains cancelled and things were crook 
• Rail loses out to roads on spending 
• One-third of myki bills 'inaccurate' 
• $100m added to cost of myki 

Is Julia Gillard doing a Beazley?

So now we have the new Labor Prime Minister, Julia Gillard, launching Labor's election campaign less than a week before the election with hardly a mention of climate change - "the greatest moral challenge of our time".

This election has been largely a content and policy free zone.  It has devolved to a game of cat and mouse between Julia Gillard and Tony Abbott, both of whom have adopted personas quite different from their own.

Gillards rapier wit and forensic precision so often admired in parliament has been replaced by a bland and carefully measured drone.  She doesn't answer questions and stays on message about "moving forwards".

Abbott's bovver boy combative style has been replaced by a forced joviality and an appearance of calmness and control befitting someone who would be prime minister.

Neither are playing their natural game and it shows.  The winner takes all game they are playing is to form government after the election.  To do this they need to win the votes of a small percentage of swinging votesr  (less than 15%) in a small number of marginal electorates - approximately 20 out of 150.

The entire election has been pitched at winning the votes of this very small proportion (less than 5%) of the Australian population - based on feedback from "focus groups" in these electorates.

Rusted on voters are taken for granted -their votes won't shift.

Voters in non-marginal seats are considered irrelevant as their votes will not determine who will win government.

So what about the issues?

Climate change

• Gillard has committed to a "community consensus of 150 randomly selected people".  There will of course be no consensus if at least one skeptic is included, and there is nothing new that will emerge that the Garnaut Climate Change Report has not covered
• Abbot has committed to NOT introducing any price on carbon pollution if he wins government, and to hand out millions of taxpayers funds as corporate welfare to large polluters to "encourage them to reduce their emissions".  This is ridiculous - the role of government is to legislate, not hand out corporate welfare.
• Gillard scores 1 out of 10, Abbott scores 0.  Neither will commit to the year Australia's emissions should peak then fall.
• Emission reductions 0.

Asylum seekers

• Gilllard has "done a Beazley" and aped Coalition (indeed Howard) policy on offshore processing.  This will disenfranchise a lot of Labor voters and drive them to the Greens.  This could a factor that costs Labor the election.  This is moving to the right and to the bottom, not moving forwards
• Abbott's policy is virtually indistinguishable from Gillard's
• Both are dog whistling on this too - dropping hints about "border security" and "Australia's population growth", both of which are completely irrelevant, but not apparently in the minds of those few voters who matter

National Broadband Network (NBN)

• This is one of the few policy areas where there is a discernible difference.  
• Labor is committing to spending $43b on fibre to 93% of homes offering speeds up to 1gbit per second.  Next generation wireless services to 4 per cent of premises and satellite services to 3 per cent will deliver speeds of 12 megabits per second.
• This has a very high cost and provides bandwidth than many people need.
• Abbott is proposing a confusing mixture of cheaper technologies - but it is quite clear he does not know what he is talking about. He has committed to killing the NBN too.
• I think about $20b should be spent on high speed internet - with the priority shifted to rural and regional Australia that currently has poor and expensive services - and the other $20b allocated to clean energy project to transition us off coal

Health

• Gillard wins on this - GP super clinics are a good idea and some additional funding for mental health have been committed too.
• Abbott will kill the GP super clinics.

The outcome will be interesting.  Labor could well lose the election in the key marginal seats, even though they are likely to have a higher overall vote.

Forests
Forest destruction and land clearing accounts for over 8% of Australia's carbon emissions, yet neither Julia Gillard nor Tony Abbott is proposing to do anything about this.  The solution is quite simple - protect our native forests for their carbon stores, biodiversity and water production.   However, the silence from Tony and Julia on this is deafening.

Indigenous Australians
The racist Northern Territory National Emergency Response Bill 2007 brought in by John Howard as an election stunt in 2007 is still in place and supported by Labor.  This legislation is racist as they first had to suspend the Racial Discrimination Act to bring it in.  This suspension is still in force.  Welfare payments are quarantined and indigenous Australians in the Northern Territory are treated differently from everybody else.

It was supposed to be an emergency in 2007, yet in 2010 indigenous affairs have not been mentioned during the campaign.  The gap has not been closed, and needs to be.  Indigenous Australians need to empowered to manage their own affairs, and more funding is required for improved health, housing and employment.

Public Transport
No federal funding is routinely allocated to the States for public transport, unlike roads which are funded 50% federally and 50% from the States.

Consequently, public transport infrastructure has lagged behind and crumbled for over 50 years.

During this election campaign, the Gillard goverment has announced funding for two new urban rail lines that both run through marginal electorates.

• Gillard has pledged $742 million for the long-awaited $1.15 billion Redcliffe rail connection, should Labor be re-elected.
• Gillard has promised to build the long-awaited $2.6 billion rail link between Parramatta and Epping.  This rail line runs through the marginal seat of Bennelong.  This is the biggest single funding announcement of Gillard's campaign so far, with $2.1 billion in federal funds towards the project, with the a state government contribution of $520 million.

Gillard have also pledged up to $20 million for a feasibility study into a fast railway linking Brisbane, Sydney, Canberra and Melbourne.  This after they has previously voted down a bill from the Greens for exactly this, prior to the election campaign.

Will we get a minority government?

I think the best outcome would be hung parliament followed by negotiation to form government with independent MPs such a Bob Katter and Tony Windsor, and possible Adam Bandt from the Greens if he wins the seat of Melbourne.

This would curb the excesses of either major party governing in their own right, with the democratic representatives of other electorates frozen out of government and forced into a largley futile opposition" role.

Perhaps it is time for political parties to be banned - as they mostly don't act in the best interests of Australia and they corrupt the basic principle of democracy by putting there "partly line" at a much higher priority than the local MPs representing their own constituents.

This is an interesting "example" of election advertising from the Gruen Nation program that we have not seen during this campaign.  It provides some food for thought.

Melbourne's train meltdown

Melbourne suffered a extreme outage today.  Nearly every train line was affected when a train's pentagraph (the bit that connects to the overhead wires) got snagged and brought down the line, causing a power outage that basically shut down Southern Cross station, then the entire rail network.

Dozens of trains were cancelled on all lines for over 2 hours.  Over 400,000 commuters were delayed on their way to work and across the rail network.  The cost to the economy has been estimated at $12 million dollars.

Martin Pakula, the state transport minister, apologised to the public, as did Metro, the new private operator of the system.

The root cause appears to be a chronic lack of investment in basic maintenance, including:

• many old trains
• wooden sleepers still abound, many of which are decades old
• signals and associated cable conduits
• the power wire system

There is obviously also no redundancy in the power system - what we saw today was a single point of failure.

The funding allocated to maintenance of Melbourne's rail system is a tiny proportion of that allocated to roads, yet every day in Melbourne the rail system moves more people to and from the CBD.  

As I have mentioned previously, no new suburban train line has been built in Melbourne since the Glen Waverley line in 1930.  Since that time Melbourne's population has increased from 1 million to over 4 million.

The privatised system is clearly a failure.  The government blames the operator (Metro) for "delivering poor service" and Metro (and previously Connex) blames the government for not investing enough in upgrading rail infrastructure.  Nobody is actually accountable any more, which is just not good enough.

As compensation, the Metro operators and the State Goverment will let people travel for free on Friday and share the $1m loss of revenue.

Here is what we need to do:

• Allocate $2b per annum to upgrade existing rail infrastructure
• Build new rail lines to suburbs that have no rail, including the Rowville and Doncaster lines.
• Plan a metro circle system for inner Melbourne that connects Parkville, Brunswick, Fitzroy, Richmond, South Yarra, South Melbourne and North Melbourne.
• Return the system to public management with clear accountability for service delivery.
• Spend no more money on the Myki card - and ditch it doesn't work.  The system really only benefits private operators - for whom it has been designed to provide revenue.  It is too complicated and the stupid "touch off" requirement impedes users greatly.
• Stop building ridiculous "roads to nowhere" projects such as Westlink and the Frankston Bypass

The total cost of $15m would have been much better spent on prevention and proper maintenance.

External links

• Shame Metro, shame, The Age
• Frustrated commuters to travel 'free' after Metro rail meltdown, The Age
• Rail chaos imperils Brumby, The Age
• Stranded by a wire, The Age
• Call to invest in rail powerlines, The Age
  

Smart roads or dumb politicians?

After decades of far too little in investment in public transport, pedestrian and cycling infrastructure, our roads are now grindng to a halt.  Gridlock, or near gridlock, is choking Melbourne.  Short journeys that take 20 minutes in no traffic can now take over an hour.

VicRoads is part of the problem.  When you have a government department with a brief to build and manage roads that consume most of the transport budget, all you get is roads and freeways.

No one in transport or government seems to understand basic maths about how may cars it takes to move too few people - and when the system grinds to a halt.

So now "Smartroads" is announced.  While this seems to be step in the right direction - trying to optimise road use between multiple types of transport - in reality this is what VicRoads has been attempting to do unsuccessfully for the last decade and prior.

The basic assumption that roads - and shared usage - will solve transport needs in a big city is incorrect.

Trying to juggle usage patterns according to the time of day is futile too.  Peak hour used to be when everybody wants to travel, but now we have constant "peak hour" in many places over much of the day - including on weekends.  Cars and trucks get in the way of cyclists, trams and buses at all times.

The solutions we need are:

• Convert Melbourne's tram network into a dedicated light rail metro, free from interference by cars and trucks
• Provide safe dedicated cycling routes that allow commuters to travel up to 50km into and across Melbourne from all directions.  Bike lanes painted on lines  that cars drive across, or bike routes based on the "time of day" won't work
• Build more heavy rail - Melbourne's population has increased by over 3 million people with no more rail infrastructure added to service new suburbs.
• Introduce a congestion tax on cars travelling with less than two people in central Melbourne.
• Genuine public consultation on transport options rather than government departments and politicians dressing up "business as usual" as something new.

Public transport - a paradigm shift is needed

Transport Minister Lyn Kosky has just quit politics, but the public transport debacle is not just her fault - it lies with the Labor government (and preceeding Liberal governments) that have spent far too little on new trains, tracks and better services.

The perennial low budget allocation for public transport compared to roads is the major reason that public transport infrastructure is now groaning to keep up with demand.

Over three million more people now live in Melbourne than when the train network was built - and the last new train line constructed in 1930 - the Glen Waverley line.

Far too little is allocated to serious improvements in sustainable transport infrastructure such as:

• New train tracks to suburbs not currently serviced by trains - such as the planned (but never delivered) Rowville (servicing Monash Uni) and Doncaster lines.
• Turning Melbourne's slow and inefficient tram network into a faster more efficient light rail network that is not impeded by traffic
• Safe and direct bike paths to provide commute and recreational riding within suburbs and to central Melbourne - with proper signposting
• A metro for inner Melbourne to take the load off congested CBD streets - linking Richmond, Fitzroy, Carlton, Melbourne University, North Melbourne, South Melbourne
• Undergrounding several CBD trams to free up streets for pedestrians and street life.
• Return public transport to public ownership and operation. The current blame game and lack of accountability for service delivery and quality - between Government and private operators - must stop.

Martin Pakula, a unionist before he entered politics, is now the Minister for Public Transport. Don't hold your breath for any rapid improvements to public transport - or shift in the Brumby government's priority focus on roads and freeways.

With climate change upon us, it is to be hoped that this situation will turn around so Melbourne's residents have convenient and effective climate friendly transport options available.

Links

• Public Transport Minister Lynne Kosky quits politics

We need funding and improved infrastructure for public transport

After several decades of neglect, Melbourne's public transport system is now running at capacity and old infrastructure is failing. Some examples of this are:

• Wooden sleepers still abound - many over 60 years old
• Trains fail when it is "too wet" and "too hot"
• The old Hitachi trains are clapped out and have very high failure rates
• No new suburban railway lines have been built since the Glen Waverley line in 1930
• The signal system is ancient - and apparently so arcane hardly anyone knows how to maintain or replace it
• No double decker trains are in use - despite one being trialled for a couple of years on the Belgrave line - apparently successfully. I caught it and it worked fine.
• Trains don't have enough route information in them. The tiny maps are hard to locate, difficult to read, and only coloured according to zones (not lines).
• The maps of tram routes are almost impossible to decipher. They are all in yellow and the numbers that designate routes are very small and hard to find.

So what have successive governments done?

Both Labor and Liberal governments have taken a "spend as little as possible" approach, regarding public transport as a burden to provide and adminster.

Jeff Kennett privatised it, with glowing promises of improvements and greater efficiency. None resulted, and the various operators morphed into single operators for train, tram and bus.

The Bracks (then Brumby) government did not reverse the privatisation, despite its obvious failure to deliver benefits. The Brumby government renewed the licences of operators, then this year change the companies that "operate" both the tram and train networks.

This is just changing the lipstick on the pig. Now millions will be spent on rebranding and new uniforms. This money would be better spent in improving and renewing infrastructure.

The train operator is even called "Metro", so now apparently we have a "metro" in name only - when the city really needs a decent new metro and more outer suburban lines.

We have a new behemoth Southern Cross Station, which also does nothing to improve train services.

The 8 billion dollar tunnel project to connect Footscray with Caulfield has gone very quiet; presumably it will have a slow and quiet death. Its benefits are dubious in any case, and it is not a metro project, despite government spin suggesting that it is. Heavy underground rail is not a metro.

The Liberal opposition criticises the Brumby government but refuses to commit to any increased expenditure as well. If the Brumby government gets turfed out - as they may - the Liberals would continue on in the same vein.

Please consider writing to your local MP on this issue. It seems they really don't care. It is up to us to make them care, and the city of Melbourne and its inhabitants (including car drivers) will all benefit if they do improve public transport.

External links

• Rail woes mount for Metro, The Age, 1 December 2009

Public transport for Melbourne rather than more freeways

Below is a map of the 1969 freeway plan for Melbourne. This is part of the 1969 Melbourne Transportation Plan commissioned by then Victorian Premier Henry Bolte, which was heavily biased in favour of freeways over public transport options such as rail.

It looks like a nightmare - Melbourne converted into Los Angeles. It is also interesting to note which freeways have been built - such as the Metropolitan Ring Road, the Monash, the Eastern, and most recently Eastlink.

Map of 1969 freeway plan for Melbourne

Here is a map from the same transport plan which shows details of proposed rail projects - including the new Rowville and Doncaster rail lines and the City Loop, which was the only one of these that was constructed.

A map of the 1969 Melbourne Transportation Plan map of rail projects

And here is a photograph of the new integrated freeway and train line linking the Perth CBC to Mandurah along the coast to the south.

Perth to Mandurah road and rail

So what has gone so horribly wrong in Melbourne? Why has no new suburban train line been built since the Glen Waverley line in 1930?.

The short answer to this is the triumph of short term politics and the road lobby over sensible transport planning.

The Brumby Victorian government announced another Victorian Transport Plan in 2008.

This plan provided no further suburban rail lines to Melbourne's east, but it did at least include some rail project in Melbourne's west and north. It also included a very expensive $8b rail tunnel linking Footscray with Caulfield to be built in stages. Given that the Eddington Report that the plan was based upon was tasked with investing "east west link needs", I have little confidence that a comprehensive study of Melbourne's transport needs and the best solutions was in fact conducted.

For example, new rail lines to new suburbs would surely carry more people than a tunnel linking two sections of Melbourne that not many people actually want to travel between.

Melbourne "metro train tunnel" and Tarneit link. Source: Eddington Report

Proponents of the train tunnel claim that "it is needed to free up capacity in the central rail network to allow more suburban lines to be built" but they don't provide any evidence to support this. The Eddington study was simply not tasked to investigate this so it is spurious to claim that it did. More politics with no planning. In any case, there are no plans or commitments to build any of the promised but never delivered rail lines such as Doncaster and Rowville.

Climate Change considerations

The proliferation of roads and freeways as primary transport infrastructure in Melbourne has proceeded with the assumption that fossil fuel supplies will continue forever, and that the associated carbon emissions don't really matter. The most recent Eddington Report and Melbourne Transport Plan did not even quantify emissions associated with transport modes. Both suggest that "hybrid cars" will provide the solution, when quite clearly they wont.

Here are some relevant facts from the Eddington Report:

• Car travel is the biggest transport source with more than 10 million trips across the city every day.
• About two million trips are in the morning peak and 78 per cent of Melburnians use their cars to get to work.
• 11.3 per cent of Melbournes used public transport during the morning peak.
• The demand for car travel is forecast to grow 30 per cent by 2031.

Taking the approximate figure of four million commute trips to and from work by car every day in Melbourne yields this information:

• Number of trips: 4,000,000
• CO2 per km (kg): .025 (average figure - for a Holden Commodore)
• Average length of commute trip: 9km
• Total tonnes of CO2 emitted: 900

A trip on a train has 1/8th the carbon emission of a trip by car, so if all these car journeys were shifted to trains, the total CO2 emissions would drop to 113 tonnes, resulting in a saving of 788 tonnes of CO2 per day.

It is therefore quite clear that rail transport should be the first priority for transport in Melbourne, after decades of neglect.

Our trains and trams are now full to capacity on existing lines and now significant new suburban lines are planned for the next decade. This is not acceptable.

Bass Straight oil is already greatly depleted and Australia now imports over 50% of its oil at considerable cost. If a proportion of the money spent on oil was redirected to climate friendly tranport modes such as rail and cycling, we would see some real benefits and long term financial payback.

Privatisation fails to deliver benefits

Melbourne's public transport system, including trains, trams and buses, was privatised by the Kennett government in 1999. This was done to supposedly create competition between private operaters and thereby provide better services. However, over the next decade several of the initial companies participating have exited. Three train operators became one - Connex, owned by Veolia. Two tram companies became one - which may soon also be taken over by Connex.

The proposed public bike scheme for Melbourne may also be operated by Connex if they win the contract to do so.

So there really is no "competition" except when tenders are renewed.

However, the worst impacts of privatisation are lack of accountability and lack of investment. The Brumby and preceding Bracks Labor government have chosen to retain privatised public transport. The government has blamed recent problems with cancelled services, faulty trains, whole system shut downs during heat waves on Connex. Connex in turn has responded that they operate the service but are not responsible for investing in sorely needed infrastructure improvements.

So it is stalemate, with nobody apparently accountable for delivering an effective and appropriate public transport network.

An unhealthy focus on revenue

Another undesirable by product of the privatisation of public transport is the unproductive focus on raising revenue from public transport users. This of course benefits the companies trying to make profits from the system. However, the large contingents of ticket inspectors, euphemistically called "Customer Service Officers" regularly stake out CBD stations and "bust" people for travelling without valid tickets.

Unfortunately, they often bust peoplewho make honest mistakes, such as those that carry a valid ticket but forget to validate it.

They are dishonest too. When they take your name and address they often suggest that you may not be fined - when the majority of people who they report actually do get fined.

Occasionally they are heavy handed and thuggish. Some people have been manhandled and even injured when they descend on someone en masse and attempt the "subdue" them. Such tactics are wholly inappropriate and should be left to the Police when they are warranted.

The Victorian government is also spending $1.35b - a huge amount of money - on the new Myki ticketing system - the benefits of which lie fairly obviously with Connex as the private operator. This money would be better spent on service improvements such as additional new trains or a new railway line. The current Metcard ticketing system was fully commissioned as late as 1998.

Conclusions

While the facts and figures associated with tranport can be daunting and difficult to find and assess, the directions we need to go in are quite clear.

We need more climate friendly rail and light rail transport to service new suburbs and growth corridors.

A metro service for Melbourne would provide better linkage between inner centres such as Carlton, Melbourne University, the Melbourne Zoo, South Yarra, South Melbourne and Footscray. A light rail metro similar to the Paris metro would be cheaper and more effective than the proposed heavy rail tunnel.

Some existing railway lines could be put underground (e.g. the Glen Waverley line through Toorak and the Box Hill line through Hawthorn to Camberwell and beyond) which would free up land above for residential, commercial, park and cycle path usage options.

More freeway projects such as the Frankston bypass should not proceed.

Cycle paths should be integrated with existing railway easements, where unused land within the easments is available.

We need a safe cycle path network that will allow commuters and recreational riders to use bicycles as the most climate friendly transport option.

We need our public transport system to be owned by and operated for the people, rather than for profits.

A safe climate future and a liveable city needs climate friendly transport options, and they are needed immediately.

Links

• Eddington Report recommendations
• CEN Eddington Report submission
• Frankston bypass
• 2008 Victorian Transport Plan
• 1969_Melbourne_Transportation_Plan
• Two in three Australians drive to work, study of commuting habits finds, ABC News, 3/2/14

Senate inquiry into Commonwealth funding for public transport

I attended a public hearing today in Melbourne (Monday 30/3/09) of the "Inquiry into the investment of Commonwealth and State funds in public passenger transport infrastructure and services"

Senate inquiry public hearing in Melbourne on Monday 30/3/09

This first ever national inquiry into public transport was initiated by Greens for WA Senator Scott Ludlum and is being conducted by the Rural and Regional Affairs and Transport Senate Committee.

The inquiry is covering:

• Assessment of direct federal government funding for public transport infrastructure
• Assessment of the benefits of public passenger transport, including integration with bicycle and pedestrian initiatives
• Lack of useful public transport for many people in middle and outer areas of Melbourne and Victorian towns.
• An audit of of Commonwealth and State funds in public passenger transport infrastructure and services
• Measures by which the Commonwealth Government could facilitate improvement in public passenger transport services and infrastructure
• The role of Commonwealth Government legislation, taxation, subsidies, policies and other mechanisms that either discourage or encourage public passenger transport (including perverse FBT incentives for people to drive their 'business" cars more).
  
• Best practice international examples of public passenger transport services and infrastructure.

As Melbourne's population grows and the challenges of climate change and oil scarcity become more pressing, it's clear that the city will be disadvantaged without a massive injection of funding into mass public transit now. The chaos commuters experienced during the heatwaves early this year, may only be the tip of the iceberg.

I listened to the Victorian Government submission today and was surprised to hear that they think the two mega rail projects in the Victorian Transport Plan (the $4b Regional Rail Link for a new track from West Werribee to Southern Cross Station and the $4.5 billion Melbourne Metro – a new rail tunnel between the city’s west and east) are the highest priority public transport projects. They also claimed that long promised by never delivered rail lines to Donvale and Rowville could not be built due to "lack of core capacity" with the current rail network. I certainly do not believe they have presented sufficient evidence to justify these claims.

Taking public transport is a critical climate-friendly means of travel and reduces our reliance on the cars that are choking Melbourne. But you cannot user it if is not there.

I spoke with Senator Ludlum after the hearing; he informed me that submissions can still be made to this inquiry - at least up until this Friday (3/4/09).

If you have time, please write a submission about the need for federal funding for improved public transport, and for better integration with bicycle and pedestrian initiatives.

The Committee prefers to receive submissions electronically as an attached document - email: rrat.sen@aph.gov.au

External links

• Senate Inquiry details, including terms of reference
• Cars beating public transport to tax breaks | theage.com.au
  
  

Preliminary analysis of the 2008 Victorian transport plan

Well, the transport plan is now out. I have read the Overview and attended the last part of the GAMUT forum held to discuss it yesterday.

The plan has been issued from a political bunker. Again, politics is really not delivering what people want or what Melbourne needs.

From the “Message from the Ministers”:

The message has been heard loud and clear: Victorians want more trains and better roads, more transport choice in the suburbs and regions, to feel safe when travelling, and to protect the environment by investing more in public transport, cycling, walking, better urban planning and greener vehicle technology. This is what The Victorian Transport Plan delivers.

But it does not deliver this.

The issues I see are:

• No meaningful public consultation process. The majority of public feedback from the Eddington report has been glossed over or ignored.

• $20b is going to roads and freeways - this is well over half of the$38b total budget

• No carbon accounting or analysis of carbon outputs per transport mode/journey

• Ongoing development of the freeway network - through very sensitive green belts (the Greensborough Templestowe connection) - which is pure RACV/Roads lobby agenda

• A secret process - even a lot of the Department of Transport were kept in the dark and only found out about its contents when it was released.

• No long term goals set - passenger journeys by mode, carbon emissions reduction, access to public transport, km of bike paths, km of railway. If you can’t measure it you can’t manage it

• No significant budget increase for bike paths and routes, and no specific commitments, despite the fact that more bikes were sold last year than cars in Australia. $100m over 3 years would have been barely adequate; they have committed to a paltry $100m over 10 years - this will just buy some paint for lane markings

• The real net cost to the economy of roads is not measured by Treasury, yet they continue to claim that “public transport costs more” - when the reverse is the case

• No acknowledgment that more roads and freeways equate to more cars. Remember CityLink was going to “solve all Melbourne’s transport needs for the future”? No the South Eastern freeway/carpark is being widened for the second time since ($2b)

• Unclear need for the Footscray to Domain rail tunnel. The rail tunnel is supposed to “provide more capacity for future train lines to connect in” yet this is not supported by evidence, and none of these train lines are actually on the drawing board (e.g. Rowville, Doncaster). Connex wants the tunnel, not the people of Melbourne.

• Safe seats suffer the impact. Road tunnels through Labor/Green marginal seats have been omitted, but tunnels through safe Labor seats (such as in the Footscray area) have not.

• Melbourne's eastern suburbs have missed out. No Rowville or Doncaster rail lines. Monash University misses out on a desperately needed railway service. Increased capacity on the Belgrave and Lilydale lines is delayed until after 2021.

This is the same bad process as the government’s water strategy. They consult secretly with industry and big business behind close doors, ignore the wisdom and needs of the public, and launch a half baked reactive plan along with an expensive (full newspaper pages) advertising.

Overall, 3/10. At least it is not 95% roads as previous plans have been.

More detailed analysis to follow.

If you live in Melbourne, contact your local MP and ask him to represent your wants and needs.

You can also contribute to 2008 Victorian transport plan, a wiki article on Greenliviningpedia.org

Links

• GAMUT: Australasian Centre for the Governance and Management of Urban Transport
• Missing in action: Climate change | theage.com.au
• Cycling funds disappoint | theage.com.au
• The Victorian Transport Plan: Download the plan
• Transport plan? The joke's on us | theage.com.au
• East misses out in transport plan: councils | theage.com.au