Re: Bankstown- mascot airports

[mauried@tpg.com.au (Maurie Daly)]

On Wed, 20 Dec 2000 18:45:45 +1100, " Ian" <iansmith@optusnet.com.au>
wrote:

>
>"Dave Proctor" <daproc@spambait.ozemail.com.au> wrote in message
>xhY%5.113284$IP1.3741699@news1.giganews.com">news:xhY%5.113284$IP1.3741699@news1.giganews.com...
>> (Cross-post added)
>>
>> Such a beuatiful summary of the problems with the airport rail line from
>> someone interested in aviation rather than rail. Perhaps this should be
>sent
>> to the managers of the line?
>>
>> Dave


Actually I am not that convinced that Rods wrong and here is a
question that no one on this news group seems to want to ask.
It basicaklly relates to most new rail projects, but lets consider
something like a Melb - Sydney VFT.

Currently there are 4 ways of getting from Melb to Sydney.
1/ By car.
2/ By Airline.
3/ By bus.
4/ By rail.

Most people rightly dismiss the rail option as being too slow which it
is .
Is there any demonstrated problem that exists with the other 3 modes
that results in people wanting to travel from Melb to Sydney being
unable to travel because the other 3 modes are simply overflowing with
people and thus unable to accomodate them.
If there is , its not obvious to me.
Most of the projections relating to VFTs base their profit projections
on attracting people away from cars,busses and airlines and onto a hi
speed train, ie there is no suggestion that a hi speed train will
cause more people to travel , ie people who now dont travel at all.
In other words we are advocating spending a huge amount of money on
simply providing yet another way for people to travel between melb and
Sydney.
Is this is the nations interest?
I dont know and I would like someone to demonstrate that it is .

Lets now consider the hi speed freight link between Melb and Brisbane,
No one has suggested that there is currently freight sitting around
that cannot be transported between Melb and Brisbane because a hi
speed freight line doesnt exist,not that the existing methods of
transporting freight namely existing rail, road and sea cannot handle
the available freight that has to be moved.
So again we come up with the scenerio that the hi speed rail line will
simply divert existing freight modes onto the hi speed rail line.
Again is this in the national interest given the cost of the hi speed
line.
Would we simply be better off spending 1/2 of the money subsidising
the existing modes , ie making track access charges free, requiring
that freight railways dont pay company tax , there are a host of ways
to subsidise existing industries.
We have just seen a classic example of the Feds and the Vic State Govt
subsidising a Holden engine plant.

I dont have a view on the above proposals other than I think that they
need to be debated,and preferably from the viewpoint of someone who
isnt a rail fan.

MD