Re: $4b transport plan to ease petrol hear

[dbromage@fang.omni.com.au (David Bromage)]

James C. (james_ccj@my-deja.com) wrote:
> In article <39ECF716.6DFAD954@fang.omni.com.au>,
>   David Bromage <dbromage@fang.omni.com.au> wrote:
> > The federal cabinet is considering using up to $4 billion from the
> sale
> > of Sydney Airport to pay for a new national rail and road building
> > scheme to try to take the political heat out of rising petrol prices.
> > The transport package is also expected to include a decision not to
> > build a major second airport in Sydney.
> >
> > http://www.theage.com.au/news/20001018/A57486-2000Oct17.html
> >
> > [Speedrail anyone?]
> What would be the priority for railway spending if you have 2b$ (Half
> of this 4b$) to spend on? VSHT?  or upgrade mainlines?

You could do both, and more.

ARA wanted something like $500 million for existing main lines. But
remember this is a one off grant which would only go to ARTC tracks.

Speedrail wanted about $1 billion over four years in tax concessions. The
"no net cost to government" provision means they have to show that the
feds would get at least that much back in other forms of revenue or
savings.

The remaining $500 million could be used for non-ARTC track upgrades,
regauging (e.g. Mt Gambier) or new construction projects (e.g. standard
gauge to Toowoomba), matched dollar for dollar by state governments.

Cheers
David