News & Discussion: Adelaide Metro Trains

[[Shuz]]

Does anyone know if diesel trains would operate between Salisbury and Gawler, assuming a Labor State Government is re-elected and they fulfil their promise of electrifying the Gawler railway line halfway to Salisbury?

I'm genuinely suprised State Labor had the nerve to say in making this annoucement considering all the criticism they levelled at the Liberals for building a one-way expressway - it's just as bad! A railway line half-electrified. What a joke.

[Norman]

They said they will lobby the federal government to give the money for electrifying the rest of the line.

[[Shuz]]

Jay Weatherill and Labor just simply do not get it then do they? Tony Abbott has explicitly stated and made it clear, time and time again, that so long as he is Prime Minister, his government will not invest in urban rail projects.

Quite frankly, I have to agree with Tony Abbott, but in part. For small-scale projects such as the electrification of the Gawler line, which if I recall, was estimated to cost around $150-$250m to complete, is not a matter for Federal Government investment. That is a project which I believe the State can, and should, bear the cost itself. And they can, easily.

Take for example - If Labor can spare $160m in the piggy bank to deliver on the ridiculous, fanciful and wasteful O-Bahn tunnel project which I believe to be a gross mis-allocation of priorities, given that there are much more pressing needs across the public transport network - why isn't that same money (all or part of it) not being invested towards the Gawler rail electrification project? It would deliver a much needed improved service and improve the quality of life, in terms of accessibility, to the 250,000 residents of Northern Adelaide.

The only investments a Federal Government should be making into urban rail projects are those which will cost several billion dollars to construct and pose higher risks in terms of financing, timeline, outlays, etc. and most importantly, are critical to relieving capacity constraints for the urban rail network. Such projects which come to mind are the Cross River Rail, Second Harbour Crossing and Melbourne Metro projects in Brisbane, Sydney and Melbourne respectively.

What the State Government should be pushing for, be it either Labor or Liberal, whoever is elected, is for Federal Government investment into the Adelaide CBD underground urban rail project to connect the Seaford and Gawler lines through the city. This is a project which will likely cost $2-3 billion dollars, take 4-6 years to build and carry a higher risk.

[muzzamo]

Take for example - If Labor can spare $160m in the piggy bank to deliver on the ridiculous, fanciful and wasteful O-Bahn tunnel project which I believe to be a gross mis-allocation of priorities, given that there are much more pressing needs across the public transport network - why isn't that same money (all or part of it) not being invested towards the Gawler rail electrification project? It would deliver a much needed improved service and improve the quality of life, in terms of accessibility, to the 250,000 residents of Northern Adelaide.

To put things in perspective, do remember that the O-Bahn is by far the most heavily patronized public transport corridor.

[[Shuz]]

Take for example - If Labor can spare $160m in the piggy bank to deliver on the ridiculous, fanciful and wasteful O-Bahn tunnel project which I believe to be a gross mis-allocation of priorities, given that there are much more pressing needs across the public transport network - why isn't that same money (all or part of it) not being invested towards the Gawler rail electrification project? It would deliver a much needed improved service and improve the quality of life, in terms of accessibility, to the 250,000 residents of Northern Adelaide.

To put things in perspective, do remember that the O-Bahn is by far the most heavily patronized public transport corridor.

Yes. It's also a system which currently works fine. There's no immediate issues that need resolving. This '4 minute saving' for $160m is just gold-plating to the maximum. O-Bahn commuters are already spoilt for convenience as it is. It is a 10-15 minute trip from Paradise to the City, a journey, which I've taken many times, is comparable, if not, faster than travelling in by car.

Also - based on your logic, let's just disregard the needs of Grange and Tonsley rail commuters. That's hardly socially equitable is it?

[Waewick]

I live East and I have 1 freaking bus service

where is the social equiality there? Put a rail/tram line down the Parade/Kensi! every other area North, West and South has one

[Aidan]

I live East and I have 1 freaking bus service

where is the social equiality there? Put a rail/tram line down the Parade/Kensi! every other area North, West and South has one

Really? Where can I catch one to get to Burton, West Beach or Woodcroft?

[Waewick]

I live East and I have 1 freaking bus service

where is the social equiality there? Put a rail/tram line down the Parade/Kensi! every other area North, West and South has one

Really? Where can I catch one to get to Burton, West Beach or Woodcroft?

Where did I say those particular suburbs were or were not?

I was merely correctly pointing that their is rail/tram in a Northern, Southern and Western Direction (in terms of our naming areas) but not eastern

But I guess I'm going to have to start expecting that sort of response from you during the election period

edit - having a look, I reckon all those suburbs are closer to rail/tram that me- Woodcroft might be line ball.

[ml69]

Jay Weatherill and Labor just simply do not get it then do they? Tony Abbott has explicitly stated and made it clear, time and time again, that so long as he is Prime Minister, his government will not invest in urban rail projects.

Quite frankly, I have to agree with Tony Abbott, but in part. For small-scale projects such as the electrification of the Gawler line, which if I recall, was estimated to cost around $150-$250m to complete, is not a matter for Federal Government investment. That is a project which I believe the State can, and should, bear the cost itself. And they can, easily.

Take for example - If Labor can spare $160m in the piggy bank to deliver on the ridiculous, fanciful and wasteful O-Bahn tunnel project which I believe to be a gross mis-allocation of priorities, given that there are much more pressing needs across the public transport network - why isn't that same money (all or part of it) not being invested towards the Gawler rail electrification project? It would deliver a much needed improved service and improve the quality of life, in terms of accessibility, to the 250,000 residents of Northern Adelaide.

The only investments a Federal Government should be making into urban rail projects are those which will cost several billion dollars to construct and pose higher risks in terms of financing, timeline, outlays, etc. and most importantly, are critical to relieving capacity constraints for the urban rail network. Such projects which come to mind are the Cross River Rail, Second Harbour Crossing and Melbourne Metro projects in Brisbane, Sydney and Melbourne respectively.

What the State Government should be pushing for, be it either Labor or Liberal, whoever is elected, is for Federal Government investment into the Adelaide CBD underground urban rail project to connect the Seaford and Gawler lines through the city. This is a project which will likely cost $2-3 billion dollars, take 4-6 years to build and carry a higher risk.

100% agree with every word you said.

[nevillness]

Jay Weatherill and Labor just simply do not get it then do they? Tony Abbott has explicitly stated and made it clear, time and time again, that so long as he is Prime Minister, his government will not invest in urban rail projects.

Quite frankly, I have to agree with Tony Abbott, but in part. For small-scale projects such as the electrification of the Gawler line, which if I recall, was estimated to cost around $150-$250m to complete, is not a matter for Federal Government investment. That is a project which I believe the State can, and should, bear the cost itself. And they can, easily.

Take for example - If Labor can spare $160m in the piggy bank to deliver on the ridiculous, fanciful and wasteful O-Bahn tunnel project which I believe to be a gross mis-allocation of priorities, given that there are much more pressing needs across the public transport network - why isn't that same money (all or part of it) not being invested towards the Gawler rail electrification project? It would deliver a much needed improved service and improve the quality of life, in terms of accessibility, to the 250,000 residents of Northern Adelaide.

The only investments a Federal Government should be making into urban rail projects are those which will cost several billion dollars to construct and pose higher risks in terms of financing, timeline, outlays, etc. and most importantly, are critical to relieving capacity constraints for the urban rail network. Such projects which come to mind are the Cross River Rail, Second Harbour Crossing and Melbourne Metro projects in Brisbane, Sydney and Melbourne respectively.

What the State Government should be pushing for, be it either Labor or Liberal, whoever is elected, is for Federal Government investment into the Adelaide CBD underground urban rail project to connect the Seaford and Gawler lines through the city. This is a project which will likely cost $2-3 billion dollars, take 4-6 years to build and carry a higher risk.

100% agree with every word you said.

Government funding is not that black and white. The Federal Government collects the bulk of tax revenue but the states have the responsibility of delivering the bulk of services and infrastructure. The size of a project and the associated risks shouldn't solely determine if Federal funding should be used.

[ChillyPhilly]

Jay Weatherill and Labor just simply do not get it then do they? Tony Abbott has explicitly stated and made it clear, time and time again, that so long as he is Prime Minister, his government will not invest in urban rail projects.

Quite frankly, I have to agree with Tony Abbott, but in part. For small-scale projects such as the electrification of the Gawler line, which if I recall, was estimated to cost around $150-$250m to complete, is not a matter for Federal Government investment. That is a project which I believe the State can, and should, bear the cost itself. And they can, easily.

Take for example - If Labor can spare $160m in the piggy bank to deliver on the ridiculous, fanciful and wasteful O-Bahn tunnel project which I believe to be a gross mis-allocation of priorities, given that there are much more pressing needs across the public transport network - why isn't that same money (all or part of it) not being invested towards the Gawler rail electrification project? It would deliver a much needed improved service and improve the quality of life, in terms of accessibility, to the 250,000 residents of Northern Adelaide.

The only investments a Federal Government should be making into urban rail projects are those which will cost several billion dollars to construct and pose higher risks in terms of financing, timeline, outlays, etc. and most importantly, are critical to relieving capacity constraints for the urban rail network. Such projects which come to mind are the Cross River Rail, Second Harbour Crossing and Melbourne Metro projects in Brisbane, Sydney and Melbourne respectively.

What the State Government should be pushing for, be it either Labor or Liberal, whoever is elected, is for Federal Government investment into the Adelaide CBD underground urban rail project to connect the Seaford and Gawler lines through the city. This is a project which will likely cost $2-3 billion dollars, take 4-6 years to build and carry a higher risk.

100% agree with every word you said.

Government funding is not that black and white. The Federal Government collects the bulk of tax revenue but the states have the responsibility of delivering the bulk of services and infrastructure. The size of a project and the associated risks shouldn't solely determine if Federal funding should be used.

Agree with the bold part. But nevillness is right. Furthermore, the Federal Government holds and selectively distributes GST revenue. I don't want my three cents' GST from my bottle of olive oil going to a $10 billion (and mostly unnecessary) road project that cuts Melbourne in half.

[fabricator]

Jay Weatherill and Labor just simply do not get it then do they? Tony Abbott has explicitly stated and made it clear, time and time again, that so long as he is Prime Minister, his government will not invest in urban rail projects.

Labor understand perfectly, Tony Abbott is an arsehole completely obsessed with expensive road projects and cars.

No change in government in history has withdrawn funding for projects promised and agreed to by a previous federal government.
Traditionally anything where contracts had been signed for construction and/or agreements made with state governments.
This is to prevent debacles like half finished road bridges with rebar sticking out the end, and the like.

What has happened is any SA public transport project, where the money hadn't been physically handed over, has been sabotaged.
This has not happened however in queensland, NSW etc, where there is a Liberal state government.

Quite frankly, I have to agree with Tony Abbott, but in part. For small-scale projects such as the electrification of the Gawler line, which if I recall, was estimated to cost around $150-$250m to complete, is not a matter for Federal Government investment. That is a project which I believe the State can, and should, bear the cost itself. And they can, easily.

You sir are an idiot.
The state government have spent the better part of $2 billion on rebuilding the rail network from the dirt up! For the Federal government to chicken out, at co-funding the final step of electrifying the lines and ordering new trains, when the amount involved is a petty $78m is bloody childish.

Instead we have a state government saddled with more debt, given the only other choice was to get sued for breach of contract.
This has happened for the Tonsley line signalling/pointwork where it was virtually finished, the Tonsley line Bus interchange which hadn't even started, and the Electrification to Salisbury where plans had been drawn up.
The Tonsley projects and the Electrification to Salisbury was particularly insulting, as in several previous discussions with the Liberal Federal Government they had agreed to fund any previous agreements for transport projects, and yet one day after a story on either project appears in the news, its "oh but we said we wouldn't fund public transport".
End result, of the $300 deficit the state has now, just over $100m of that is a direct result of the Liberal Party sabotage of passenger rail projects.

This is not election promises I am talking about, these are projects agreed to by the previous Labor Federal Government, weeks or months before the caretaker mode kicked in. Small sums of money that only an idiot would argue over.

[Waewick]

isn't the delay in the Gawler line our own fault?

We delayed it and the Feds rightly asked for their money back?

[Nathan]

isn't the delay in the Gawler line our own fault?

We delayed it and the Feds rightly asked for their money back?

Didn't the feds yank the money to give to Queensland after the floods, or is my memory a bit hazy?

[Waewick]

isn't the delay in the Gawler line our own fault?

We delayed it and the Feds rightly asked for their money back?

Didn't the feds yank the money to give to Queensland after the floods, or is my memory a bit hazy?

that was the O-bahn upgrade from memory.