Sensational-Adelaide.com

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

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

“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.

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.

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.

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.

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

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.

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.

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.