Skyscraper City Forum banner
1 - 13 of 13 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
450 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 · (Edited)
Infrastructure Australia: 'Spend more, waste more. Australia's roads in 2014. Moving beyond gambling'

The Infrastructure Australia report, obtained by Fairfax Media, has also delivered a scathing critique of “monopoly” state-run road entities such as VicRoads, claiming a culture of resisting reform has led to a situation in which political leaders are held “captive” to demands for more funding.
“The unhealthy focus of road agencies appears set on ‘getting, controlling and spending’ more taxpayer money, rather than questioning efficiency or value to the motorist and governments,” the report says.
The report, "Spend more, waste more, Australia's roads in 2014: moving beyond gambling," was sent to industry experts on Tuesday for comment. But, just hours after it was circulated, Infrastructure Australia’s acting coordinator John Fitzgerald ordered its withdrawal.
Advertisement
Mr Fitzgerald said the report had been emailed “in error” by a consultant. He said it had been withdrawn because he had not read it, nor had it been properly considered by the Infrastructure Australia council or the federal government.
“While I’m still here, I value good processes to ensure that publications from Infrastructure Australia are of the highest quality,” Mr Fitzgerald said.


Read more: http://www.theage.com.au/victoria/b...ent8221-way-20140722-zvqcg.html#ixzz3Bffuvo1S

Infrastructure Australia has distanced itself from the report, issuing a statement saying it has no knowledge of the release of the document, has not reviewed it and does not want it to represent their views.

"On learning that the document had been released and purported to state views of Infrastructure Australia, I requested that it be withdrawn," said interim infrastructure coordinator, John Fitzgerald.

Nevertheless, the Yarra Campaign for Action on Transport, a campaign group for public transport in Victoria, went ahead and uploaded the report onto its website anyway. "Australia’s nearly $20 billion dollar annual road spend can only be described as hideously inefficient," the campaign group quotes from the report on its site.
Read more: http://www.choice.com.au/media-and-...alias-road-spending-300714.aspx#ixzz3Bf1kYtRH

For anyone who wants to read the whole document, the link is below.

http://www.ycat.org.au/wp-content/uploads/2014/07/Draft-IA-Roads-Report.pdf

QOUTES FROM THE REPORT
Between 2008-09 and 2011-12, over $4.5 billion more was spent on roads than was raised in almost all road taxes and charges.
"It is ironic that as long ago as 2007 the Council of Australian Governments Road Reform Project was begun. This multi-million dollar process has been led mostly by road agencies themselves; it has deliberated largely outside of public view. On the evidence available, it has achieved nothing, other than to reject outright some of the pillars of Australia’s competition principles."
"The real problem is that road agencies and other road project proponents in industry and the community spend next to no effort examining what problems
their projects and plans are trying to solve, other than the perceived problem that they do not have enough road funding. In other words, the answer is almost always ‘I just need more money’, regardless
of the question. The present political appetite at all levels of government is to build more roads. But the ‘just give us more money’ approach observable from Australia’s road agencies cannot be considered a prudent course for governments to agree to, yet there is little evidence of the road system offering any better solutions."
Unlike almost every other agency imaginable across all levels of government, road agencies cannot be held to task for not achieving outcomes or meeting standards. None are expected of roads.
Roads continue to be untouched by the National Competition Reforms that drove productivity and reshaped the Australian economy through the 1990s.
There is no oversight of road spending patterns, or of outcomes for the money spent. There is in fact no national information available whatsoever on the condition of Australia’s road asset. There are no minimum agreed standards for different classes of Australian roads, against which taxpayer revenue might be allocated with greater fairness, efficiency and transparency and measured for its ongoing contribution to improving outcomes.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,079 Posts
IA trying to stomp on it does not make what it says any less accurate - if anything it adds to its verisimilitude.

The stuff about the Chullora issue is fascinating but utterly unsurprising.
 

·
̙͈̩ͫ̎Ż̌ͫ&
Joined
·
3,549 Posts
Between 2008-09 and 2011-12, over $4.5 billion more was spent on roads than was raised in almost all road taxes and charges.
Which if you note annual expenditure is of the order $18 billion, makes this around 6% or sweet **** all.

And if you choose a different period, taxes and charges well exceeded road infrastructure spending.

The alternative question, and I guarantee it's far, far more than 6%, how much more has been spent on public transport compared with income raised from it?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
6,329 Posts
Which if you note annual expenditure is of the order $18 billion, makes this around 6% or sweet **** all.

And if you choose a different period, taxes and charges well exceeded road infrastructure spending.

The alternative question, and I guarantee it's far, far more than 6%, how much more has been spent on public transport compared with income raised from it?

To be fair, it shouldn't be covering its complete costs at the farebox, but point well made. Anyone who supports keeping the Hurstbridge line, has no place criticising road funding.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
6,329 Posts
IPART does estimates of the non private costs and benefits of the Sydney rail system as part of their pronouncement on the subsidy. Worth a read. The benefits aren't as great as some imagine, and of course fall unevenly.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
 

·
Insane Gunzel
Joined
·
1,296 Posts
Which if you note annual expenditure is of the order $18 billion, makes this around 6% or sweet **** all.

And if you choose a different period, taxes and charges well exceeded road infrastructure spending.

The alternative question, and I guarantee it's far, far more than 6%, how much more has been spent on public transport compared with income raised from it?
The problem is that roads appear to break even on paper (but are still enormously subsidised overall) while railways don't.

However, if you were to also count intangible costs - land wastage, lost productivity due to congestion, health effects over the very long term, accidents, and so on - roads fall far, far lower.

These things are rarely (ie. never) taken into account when building new roads. :eek:hno:
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
230 Posts
Major surprise we can,t build roads efficiently!!!! NOT!! Just go to any one of the sites and check out the size of the office complex and the amount of company vehicles all parked there in the car park
 
1 - 13 of 13 Posts
Top