Liberals plan to scrap tram extension & Port River Bridg

[Will]

We'll bring tram, bridge contracts back to table
By LAURA ANDERSON
28dec05
THE Liberal Party will move to renegotiate contracts on the State Government's tram extension and Port River opening bridges if elected in March.

Opposition Leader Rob Kerin said funds for the $21 million tram extension down King William St and the $178 million opening of road and rail bridges over the Port River could be better spent.
When questioned whether the Liberal Party would scrap the two proposals, Mr Kerin said "if we could, we would".
"You can always renegotiate," he said yesterday. "For example, what can you save if you make these closed bridges?
"That money could go back into roads." However, he said the Liberal Party would not break any contracts already entered into.
Mr Kerin said a Liberal Government would put road safety ahead of "stunt-driven headlines".
"Good roads might not deliver a big headline but they mean safer travel and more cost-efficient transport for South Australian industry," he said.
Transport Minister Patrick Conlon said "we have heard all of this before from the Opposition".
"Let us just remember next year we will spend $266 million on road infrastructure, compared with the $129 million they spent in 2001-02," he said.
Mr Kerin said the State Government had neglected roads, with almost $200 million in backlog maintenance across the state. He said there needed to be a "substantial" increase in road funding, naming the Victor Harbor Rd and the road to Cape Jervis as two roads in urgent need of further funding.
Mr Kerin said a Liberal Government would also not support flagged extensions to the Glenelg tramline to Port Adelaide and the city's West End.

[Al]

That's seems typical of an opposition party and especially of the SA libs. I guess their policy is to oppose every plan put in place as long as it doesn't end up backfiring (hence the "won't break any contracts" comment) and as long as it has some support amongst the voters. I admire a government which can make the hard decisions even if it's not what the voters necessarily want and then stick to it. The ACC's decision to kill off the joining of Vic Square after it spent thousands analysing the idea and then signing off, is an example of indecision amongst the decision makers. I guess if the libs want any chance of winning the next election I guess they'll throw all sorts of statements at the voting public but what'll win my vote is what they will do instead of what they won't do.

[Howie]

In the paper today... finally someone telling it as it is. Libs at it with another headline grab.

Libs losing traction in tram debate
By LAURA ANDERSON
07jan06

"AN ICONIC project that would make Adelaide more accessible for visitors, workers and residents . . ."

That was how Premier Mike Rann first described Adelaide's transport upgrade and the purchase of 11 "super trams" to replace the city's much-loved, but less than comfortable, H-type stock.

"This is a first step in developing a modern rapid transit system for Adelaide," he said at the time.

The announcement was heralded at the time, helping to fill the good news quota of the Government, and in particular the Premier.

Fast forward several months - and the headlines and talkback callers are singing a different tune. "$21m can be better spent elsewhere." "Not enough seats for Adelaide's commuters." "Trams will put us on a road to ruin" and "City tram line plan is crazy".






The state's peak motorists' body, the RAA, set the ball rolling by branding the tram extension as "absolutely crazy" - and hardly cost effective.

While the association raised the ire of Transport Minister Patrick Conlon, the RAA say members are backing their position.

The Liberal Party also has announced that if elected in March, it will move to renegotiate contracts on the tram extension down King William St.

This has given the Opposition momentum, and another chance to kick the Government for wasting resources - a favoured attacking point of the Liberals.

Opposition transport spokesman Iain Evans says the money could have been spent better elsewhere.

The Opposition also believes the Government has bought the wrong trams, with a reduced seating capacity offering no "vision for the future of public transport". However, the Government argues they needed to replace 76-year old rolling stock, and the new trams - used worldwide - offer air-conditioning and for the first time access for disabled commuters.

They have flagged the $21 million extension down King William St and North Tce as part of a bigger picture, which includes an extension to North Adelaide, Port Adelaide or the city's West End.

However, the investment is being frequently used by political opponents as a comparative point of reference.

"If they can find $21 million for trams, they should be able to find more than $200,000 to save this industry," Independent MLC Nick Xenophon said of the Government's response to egg producers last week. Yet another free kick.

The real issue, however, is how the public debate on trams will be played out on ballot papers across the state.

Are voters more likely to support a party that has put forward a proposal or a party that has focused on the negatives, without putting forward an alternative?

A poll conducted last month exclusively for The Advertiser put the ALP on a two-party preferred vote of 55 per cent - 10 percentage points ahead of the Liberals.

Targeting the Government on trams is a smart political move by the Liberals to grab headlines and airtime.

But whether it influences voters enough to reverse the predicted landslide to the ALP is yet to be seen.

[Al]

While the association raised the ire of Transport Minister Patrick Conlon, the RAA say members are backing their position.

That excludes this RAA member. I have never been asked if I supported the organisations views and certainly never voted for any of the current board members. The RAA is only concerned about getting more motorists and less people using any form of public transport. I have never heard the RAA championing the need for upgraded trains or buses and I doubt I ever will.

[Will]

While the association raised the ire of Transport Minister Patrick Conlon, the RAA say members are backing their position.

That excludes this RAA member. I have never been asked if I supported the organisations views and certainly never voted for any of the current board members. The RAA is only concerned about getting more motorists and less people using any form of public transport. I have never heard the RAA championing the need for upgraded trains or buses and I doubt I ever will.

My father and myself are both RAA members and we do not support the organisations views on the tram extension.

[shibby]

this is typical of the liberals to scrap every good project there is for adelaide
although in the paper today, there are reports that the senoir leaders are not going to bother playing a huge role in the election due to many reports of landslide victory expected.

[ReallyBad]

Guess this topic is a non-event now...