State Election 2010

Anything goes here.. :) Now with Beer Garden for our smoking patrons.

Who do you intend to vote for at the 2010 election?

Labor
40
45%
Liberal
32
36%
Greens
11
12%
Family First
0
No votes
Democrats
2
2%
Nationals
0
No votes
Independent (Other)
4
4%
 
Total votes: 89

Message
Author
Alyx
High Rise Poster!
Posts: 270
Joined: Tue Aug 08, 2006 9:49 pm
Location: Adelaide

Re: State Election 2010

#256 Post by Alyx » Fri Mar 19, 2010 11:01 am

I felt this was probably the most appropriate place for these articles. If not, moderators, feel free to split it.
RailSA - Anthony Caggiano wrote:Trains need to get on track – minor parties

The duplication of services, questions about electrification and quality of service are all issues that will be pushed on the next government, minor parties say.

Spokesperson for Family First Nicholas Greer says Family First’s biggest concern is for a proper state wide planning of public transport to be done to better service everyone’s needs.

“Adelaide has laid and then ripped up 14 separate rail lines – including a line that already went right past Seaford..., we’ve closed passenger lines to the Barossa; and closed lines to places such as Mount Barker and Victor Harbor due to interstate gauge standardisation. In FAMILY FIRST's opinion, Adelaide would be a more vibrant and easily accessible city if many of these lines had not been shut down,” he said.

Mr Greer says Adelaide’s wide range of public service vehicles would cause unnecessary costs in maintenance and that the party has pitched this to the government in parliament.

He says the Belair line should be electrified to reduce the later servicing requirements of the sole diesel line.

The party also says the Keswick station is poorly located but has doubts as to the cost effectiveness of the Liberal’s proposal.

Trains would better suit high-capacity travel to venues like AAMI and the Entertainment Centre, the party says.

Proper thought into public transport services is an issue for SA Democrats, Third candidate for Legislative Council Sandra Kanck says.

The party want to extend the Belair line as far as Murray Bridge and extend the Gawler line to Barossa Valley and Roseworthy for the proposed population expansion of 110,000 to the region, as written in the recent Adelaide 30 year report.

The Noarlunga line should also be extended to Seaford and Aldinga and potentially a new line to McLaren vale she said.

There was room to create a new freight line to the east of Mt Lofty Ranges.

How power for electric trains would be generated is an issue for The Democrats.

“If, for instance, the source is coal-fired generation from the Port Augusta power stations, that electricity would be highly greenhouse gas intensive, and to some extent would defeat part of the environmental upside of having more public transport,” Ms Kanck said.

Upgrades to the Keswick station to better assist travellers get to the suburban rail services was said to be a potentially more cost-effective option than the Liberal plan, she said.

Greens MLC Mark Parnell has panned the government’s developments of new housing and access to these sites.

In an interview with 5AA about the 30 year plan for South Australia last month, Mr Parnell said transport services need to be confirmed before land developments.

“...If the government is going to develop something like Buckland Park they have to commit to getting a fixed rail line out there … otherwise you’ve got people attracted out to the urban fringe by these cheap house and land packages and once out there they’re going to be marooned by incredible petrol prices because it’s nowhere near anything.”

Mark was a fan of the Smart Card ticketing system announced in February.

“At the moment, there aren’t many incentives to use public transport. People aren’t stupid – they weigh up the cost, convenience and reliability of driving versus catching a train, tram or bus, he said.

“If you get fifty or a hundred bucks off your car rego because you catch the train or the bus more, then that’s an extra bit of encouragement.”

He also believes public transport should be free to school children.

“The Greens call on the Rann Government to extend that to the next generation.

“We need to do everything we can to encourage school children out of cars and into more sustainable forms of transport,” he said.

- By Anthony Caggiano for RailSA

From http://www.railsa.org/forums/viewtopic. ... 265#p50265
And on our tram network:
RailSA - Anthony Caggiano wrote:Trams need more thinking – minor parties

The success of current tram developments and the greater vision for light rail in Adelaide needs more thinking, minor parties say.

Spokesperson for Family First Nicholas Greer says light rail services should be directed towards North Adelaide and the eastern half of the CBD and the port area should be serviced by heavy rail.

He says the party suggests a rail loop of the current trams network in the CBD and thinks there is little benefit in the current extension to the Entertainment Centre, preferring a heavy rail option over the “coast to coast” light rail option.

“Light rail does not cope well with large numbers of commuters leaving a venue at the same time (such as the Entertainment Centre),” he said.

He said the party also suggests the current tram line be converted to standard heavy rail gauge should the proposed 'tram-trains' be bought.

Third candidate for Legislative Council of SA Democrats Sandra Kanck says the party is “bemused by the duplication and even triplication of services” to the Bowden area and questioned the government’s intentions with heavy-rail networks in the area.

“What this (the current team extension) will ultimately mean to the Outer Harbor rail line is yet to be revealed by the state government, but it does appear to be policy on the run. Perhaps we will see the phasing-out of the heavy-rail system, ” she says.

She says the party wants the Grange rail line to go to AAMI Stadium and be converted to light rail and potentially the Outer Harbor and Grange lines become light rail services too.

The current extension to the Entertainment Centre would be used regardless of who wins this Saturday’s election, Ms Kanck says.

“Light rail is always a better option in urban areas where frequent stopping is involved. The fuel efficiencies are not there for heavy rail in this regard, and some of our heavy rail services in metropolitan Adelaide would be better served by light rail.”

Senator for Greens Mark Parnell did not offer a direct comment, however he referred to the 1993 report “Greening Adelaide with Public Transport” that supported the idea of a light rail network in general in Adelaide to increase public transport use.

The report says a light rail service would provide a more green and cost effective manner for future public transport development particularly over the O-Bahn system as there are more “green” developments in electrical supply than fuel use.

Mr Parnell was the Campaign Coordinator – SA Branch of the Australian Conservation Foundation when the report was published.

He was critical of the recently released 30 year plan for Adelaide where the proposed TODs were a bit haphazard and didn’t necessarily follow any current transport network, seeing further urban sprawl in Adelaide.

In the ABC story “Transport Trip” on Stateline last year Mr Parnell said the current government needed to carefully consider its sites, noting the Buckland Park green suburb.

“It has been roundly condemned by planning professionals as being entirely the wrong way to plan the city. You know, building dormitory suburbs on the outskirts of a city with no public transport is the thinking of last century and we can't do things like that in Adelaide if we're serious about reducing our pollution and increasing our quality of life” Mr Parnell is quoted as saying.

- By Anthony Caggiano for RailSA

From http://www.railsa.org/forums/viewtopic. ... 264#p50264
Last edited by Alyx on Fri Mar 19, 2010 6:56 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Straze
High Rise Poster!
Posts: 134
Joined: Fri Oct 16, 2009 3:50 pm

Re: State Election 2010

#257 Post by Straze » Fri Mar 19, 2010 1:05 pm

“Light rail is always a better option in urban areas where frequent stopping is involved. The fuel efficiencies are not there for heavy rail in this regard, and some of our heavy rail services in metropolitan Adelaide would be better served by light rail.”

Senator for Greens Mark Parnell did not offer a direct comment, however he referred to the 1993 report “Greening Adelaide with Public Transport” that supported the idea of a light rail network in general in Adelaide to increase public transport use.

The report says a light rail service would provide a more green and cost effective manner for future public transport development particularly over the O-Bahn system as there are more “green” developments in electrical supply than fuel use.
In my opinion trains work well on the Outer Harbor Line because you can use more than one carriage which is essential during peak periods and special events i.e. Clipsal 500/Skyshow, Royal Adelaide Show, Christmas Pageant and New Years Eve whereas trams have to be cautious of other road users when travelling in Adelaide city streets and platforms in the city streets generally cant fit more than one or two carriages. Trains don't have to fight with other road users as they travel on their own right of way which means travel times are reduced and it is safer. Trams are not always the better option in urban areas or high density cities for example in New York the underground trains work well in transporting alot of passengers both fast and efficiently - could you imagine what it would be like if New York replace their trains for trams it would not only be slow and almost impossible to move in the city streets but many streets would have to be changed as some of them are one way streets. Any form of public transport in Adelaide could increase usage just by improving frequency, routes, bus priority to give them the advantage over other road users and improving safety. The buses used on the O-Bahn are nowdays using Euro 5 standard diesel so they are becoming more cost effective and less fuel dependent, the O-Bahn is a better option over a tramline because buses can pick people up from the suburbs and transported fast and without transferring/long waiting to the CBD, yes i know during the day some buses only feed to the O-Bahn stations yet if some routes were through run to Adelaide Airport, Marion, Goodwood Road & South Road which is attractive for both city commuters and crosstown commuters. So i say keep the Entertainment Centre to Glenelg tramline as it is, keep all train lines as they are and work on feeding buses to a tram or train station and keep the Go Zone routes through run.
Do yourself a favour and come to South Australia.

User avatar
rhino
Super Size Scraper Poster!
Posts: 3093
Joined: Thu Sep 29, 2005 4:37 pm
Location: Nairne

Re: State Election 2010

#258 Post by rhino » Fri Mar 19, 2010 1:22 pm

The advantage of trams is that the carriageway exsists - it's the road. This is their great advantage over new train lines or O'Bahns in old urban areas. On this exsisting road, trams can carry more people than busses, and so they are better suited to routes that carry a lot of passengers to a particular place - for example they are better than busses on arterial routes. Busses are still better for feeders, and trains are still better in their exsisting corridors, providing they do get the use they are capable of getting.
cheers,
Rhino

mgb
High Rise Poster!
Posts: 181
Joined: Sat Mar 15, 2008 12:52 pm

Re: State Election 2010

#259 Post by mgb » Fri Mar 19, 2010 2:51 pm

From ABC news website. http://www.abc.net.au/news/stories/2010 ... ion=justin

I don't have a AFR subscription, but maybe if someone does the real article would be interesting to see.


A hospital funding furore is threatening to derail the Liberal Party's push to form government on the eve of the South Australian election.

Treasurer Kevin Foley has branded the Liberals' promised Royal Adelaide Hospital (RAH) savings a hoax after the Opposition's Treasury spokesman, Steven Griffiths, admitted $1 billion in savings from rebuilding the hospital would not be realised until 2016.

When asked by the Financial Review newspaper if that meant the Liberals' previous statements had been spin, Mr Griffiths reportedly said: "In essence, yes".

The timing could hardly be worse for the Opposition. While it has been polling strongly during the campaign, the Liberal Party must hold all its seats in South Australia and win 10 from Labor to seize power in the 47-seat chamber.

South Australia and Tasmania both go to the polls on Saturday and both elections are shaping up as cliff-hangers.

In South Australia, Mr Foley says Mr Griffith's comments go to the core of trust and competence for a potential government.

"The very end of a campaign for that very frank admission demonstrates that the Liberal Party has been involved in a hoax, that they have deliberately gone about misleading South Australians, wanting South Australians to believe that they had an extra billion dollars up their sleeve," he said.

Over the next four years, the Liberals have set aside $10 million towards their proposed $700 million redevelopment of the RAH.

Mr Griffiths said the costings had been checked by a major accounting firm.

"Our hospital will be delivered to the people of South Australia in 2016," he said.

User avatar
rhino
Super Size Scraper Poster!
Posts: 3093
Joined: Thu Sep 29, 2005 4:37 pm
Location: Nairne

Re: State Election 2010

#260 Post by rhino » Fri Mar 19, 2010 3:27 pm

Griffiths admitted that there won't actually be any saving until the job is finished, in 2016. Basically this means that there won't be any money to do the other things they say they're going to do with the savings, until 2016.

Last night on ABC radio, while I was driving home, he was telling Sonya Feldhoff that the Libs will do everything that Labor was going to do, with the exceptions of the hospital and the stadium, but without borrowing money. I thought this was interesting because his budget came in at $700,000 more than Labor's, and he had already said that the Libs would show more money in surplus at the end of this term. How he intends to do that without borrowing any money, I can't understand. Maybe more assets are going to go up for sale? Maybe more services are going to be outsourced? It would be interesting to know.
cheers,
Rhino

Waewick
Super Size Scraper Poster!
Posts: 3791
Joined: Tue Jun 10, 2008 1:39 pm

Re: State Election 2010

#261 Post by Waewick » Fri Mar 19, 2010 3:53 pm

more rubbish during the potitical campaign

this has to be the worst campaign I can remember it has been more about how bad other team is than how good we are.

User avatar
rhino
Super Size Scraper Poster!
Posts: 3093
Joined: Thu Sep 29, 2005 4:37 pm
Location: Nairne

Re: State Election 2010

#262 Post by rhino » Fri Mar 19, 2010 4:05 pm

:lol: :lol: :lol: Have you guys seen the latest Hitler youtube clip featuring Adolph Hitler as Isobel Redmond? It's very funny.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cfs5pZv6AnY

The guy who made the clips says: "Before anyone goes the sulk, let me point out that I'm not comparing the SA Liberals to the Nazis. The Nazis were far more organised." :)
cheers,
Rhino

peas_and_corn
Legendary Member!
Posts: 522
Joined: Thu Oct 30, 2008 9:32 pm

Re: State Election 2010

#263 Post by peas_and_corn » Fri Mar 19, 2010 4:14 pm

capitalist wrote:more rubbish during the potitical campaign

this has to be the worst campaign I can remember it has been more about how bad other team is than how good we are.
The 2004 federal campaign was little more than negative campaigning. Sadly it's a tactic that works and thus negative campaigning is more and more dominant.

Waewick
Super Size Scraper Poster!
Posts: 3791
Joined: Tue Jun 10, 2008 1:39 pm

Re: State Election 2010

#264 Post by Waewick » Fri Mar 19, 2010 4:15 pm

The Rann one is better

(and more original :!: )

Waewick
Super Size Scraper Poster!
Posts: 3791
Joined: Tue Jun 10, 2008 1:39 pm

Re: State Election 2010

#265 Post by Waewick » Fri Mar 19, 2010 4:17 pm

peas_and_corn wrote:
capitalist wrote:more rubbish during the potitical campaign

this has to be the worst campaign I can remember it has been more about how bad other team is than how good we are.
The 2004 federal campaign was little more than negative campaigning. Sadly it's a tactic that works and thus negative campaigning is more and more dominant.
I was only thinking the other day, I am a fan of complusory voting for a number of reason however I do believe it results in what we have now, two parties who don't differ a great deal but to get elected they try and tell people how bad the other is.

I think ilike the Tassie votting system with the 5 people per region system, I reckon that would work here and it would allow parties to be different because they would always have sitting members.

User avatar
AtD
VIP Member
VIP Member
Posts: 4579
Joined: Wed Jul 20, 2005 7:00 pm
Location: Sydney

Re: State Election 2010

#266 Post by AtD » Fri Mar 19, 2010 5:05 pm

Election eve odds: $2.70 for a Lib premier, $1.45 for the ALP.

User avatar
Howie
VIP Member
VIP Member
Posts: 4877
Joined: Mon Mar 21, 2005 3:55 pm
Location: Adelaide
Contact:

Re: State Election 2010

#267 Post by Howie » Fri Mar 19, 2010 5:56 pm

AtD wrote:Election eve odds: $2.70 for a Lib premier, $1.45 for the ALP.
Wow that's tightened quite a bit.

User avatar
rhino
Super Size Scraper Poster!
Posts: 3093
Joined: Thu Sep 29, 2005 4:37 pm
Location: Nairne

Re: State Election 2010

#268 Post by rhino » Fri Mar 19, 2010 6:03 pm

capitalist wrote:I think ilike the Tassie votting system with the 5 people per region system, I reckon that would work here and it would allow parties to be different because they would always have sitting members.
I think our local council and our electorate should be the same thing. Our elected member should, by default, be the local mayor or someone of equal status - maybe each electorate/council would have a mayor and a MHA. We'd get rid of a layer of government, and local members would be forced to have a much higher profile in their community, making the average punter keener to vote.
cheers,
Rhino

Aidan
Super Size Scraper Poster!
Posts: 2148
Joined: Fri Dec 08, 2006 3:10 am
Location: Christies Beach

Re: State Election 2010

#269 Post by Aidan » Fri Mar 19, 2010 6:08 pm

rhino wrote:
capitalist wrote:I think ilike the Tassie votting system with the 5 people per region system, I reckon that would work here and it would allow parties to be different because they would always have sitting members.
I think our local council and our electorate should be the same thing. Our elected member should, by default, be the local mayor or someone of equal status - maybe each electorate/council would have a mayor and a MHA. We'd get rid of a layer of government, and local members would be forced to have a much higher profile in their community, making the average punter keener to vote.
That would encourage smaller local councils, which would probably drive up costs.

Alternatively if state electorates replaced LGAs there would be a lot of extra bureaucracy every time the boundaries were redrawn.
Just build it wrote:Bye Union Hall. I'll see you in another life, when we are both cats.

User avatar
skyliner
Super Size Scraper Poster!
Posts: 2359
Joined: Tue Oct 24, 2006 9:16 pm
Location: fassifern (near Brisbane)

Re: State Election 2010

#270 Post by skyliner » Fri Mar 19, 2010 6:45 pm

capitalist wrote:more rubbish during the potitical campaign

this has to be the worst campaign I can remember it has been more about how bad other team is than how good we are.
This is the usual thing with politics - esp. if you have nothing really to offer. Makes you wonder how much Rann is spinning around - sorry, pun not intended. I have watched dozens of political campaigns (strangely interested - some would say morbidly so). The common factor - cut the others down.

SA - STATE ON THE MOVE
Jack.

Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Ahrefs [Bot] and 6 guests