Re: Road vs Rail

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

On Sat, 11 Nov 2000 12:49:41 +1100, "Alex Pout"
<alpout@optusnet.com.au> wrote:

>This may be a FAQ, but does anyone know the comparison between spending on
>roads and rail.  For example, last year a total of $X was spent on Ykm of
>roads, but $P was spent of Q km of rail.
>
>I'm just thinking that while a lot of money seems to be spent on upgrading
>roads (the Hume and Pacific Hwys, for example), relatively little goes to
>upgrading the rail network.  If a proportional amount of money was spent on
>rail as roads, surely this would improve the situation.
>
>Consider that some roads are federally funded, some are state, and some are
>council.  Would a similar situation help rail?
>
>--
>Alex Pout
>alpout@optusnet.com.au
>ICQ 81175245
>
>
There is far more spent on road than on rail,but its a difficult
question to answer when one gets to who spends the money and on what.
The Feds spend a fair amount on the National Highway System and on
roads of national significance whilst the States spend a lot on more
local roads.
Neither State or the Feds spend very much at all on rail.
 Obviously more spending on rail by either the Feds or the States
would be beneficial,but neither have shown any inclination to do so.
In my view ,this problem will not be solved whilst ownership of rail
in this country remains in the hands of Governments ,as the non
spending on rail is a bi partisan policy.

What little money is spent on rail,is also poorly spent.
We have a situation where the SA,NT and the Feds are spending $450 M
to get the AP to darwin line built , when the same amount spent on
fixing the shocking rail alignments on the east coast would provide
far more benefit.
Unfortunately fixing up existing infrastructure doesnt attract
anywhere as more political glory as having some one like the PM
opening a brand new line.

MD