hkskyline
September 9th, 2005, 06:18 AM
Australia's failing infrastructure needs $100bn boost to keep pace, engineers say
8 September 2005
The Age
AUSTRALIA'S rail network, local roads and stormwater and irrigation systems are barely adequate, each receiving a C-minus in a damning report into the nation's infrastructure.
Industry lobby group Engineers Australia, which gave the country's roads, rail network, electricity, gas, ports, water and airports a grading between A and F, found all required significant improvement before they met current and future needs.
The 2005 Australian Infrastructure Report Card gave an overall C-plus, an improvement, on the "abysmal" D-plus infrastructure was awarded in 2000, chief executive Peter Taylor said. But Australia had not made huge progress in five years. The standard of electricity supply and ports had declined, and rail networks, roads and stormwater and irrigation systems were the worst performing sectors.
He told the National Press Club yesterday it might take $100 billion to improve the systems. The report found many metropolitan rail networks were becoming congested, widespread delays remained and there were uncertainties with new investments.
"The Melbourne to Sydney to Brisbane corridor is still sub-standard and is seriously affecting rail freight viability," Mr Taylor said.
And cars were placing unsustainable demands on the road systems in major cities. The report estimated the total cost of congestion at $3 billion a year. Mr Taylor said significant improvements in public transport were essential to combat the problem and he believed a congestion tax, already in place in Singapore and London, would also be introduced in Australia.
Mr Taylor said most stormwater systems were old and funds for maintenance, repairs and renewals lacking. "Flood damage is the most expensive of Australia's natural disasters, averaging more than $300 million per year," he said.
Engineers Australia has called on the Government to establish an independent national infrastructure council. It would determine priorities for significant projects and decide whether they were better funded by the public or private sector.
8 September 2005
The Age
AUSTRALIA'S rail network, local roads and stormwater and irrigation systems are barely adequate, each receiving a C-minus in a damning report into the nation's infrastructure.
Industry lobby group Engineers Australia, which gave the country's roads, rail network, electricity, gas, ports, water and airports a grading between A and F, found all required significant improvement before they met current and future needs.
The 2005 Australian Infrastructure Report Card gave an overall C-plus, an improvement, on the "abysmal" D-plus infrastructure was awarded in 2000, chief executive Peter Taylor said. But Australia had not made huge progress in five years. The standard of electricity supply and ports had declined, and rail networks, roads and stormwater and irrigation systems were the worst performing sectors.
He told the National Press Club yesterday it might take $100 billion to improve the systems. The report found many metropolitan rail networks were becoming congested, widespread delays remained and there were uncertainties with new investments.
"The Melbourne to Sydney to Brisbane corridor is still sub-standard and is seriously affecting rail freight viability," Mr Taylor said.
And cars were placing unsustainable demands on the road systems in major cities. The report estimated the total cost of congestion at $3 billion a year. Mr Taylor said significant improvements in public transport were essential to combat the problem and he believed a congestion tax, already in place in Singapore and London, would also be introduced in Australia.
Mr Taylor said most stormwater systems were old and funds for maintenance, repairs and renewals lacking. "Flood damage is the most expensive of Australia's natural disasters, averaging more than $300 million per year," he said.
Engineers Australia has called on the Government to establish an independent national infrastructure council. It would determine priorities for significant projects and decide whether they were better funded by the public or private sector.