Re: April Digest - congrats Max Michell

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

On Wed, 18 Apr 2001 07:58:31 GMT, "Dave Proctor"
<daproc@spambait.ozemail.com.au> wrote:

>"Grahame Ferguson" <grahamef@users.mcmedia.com.au> wrote in message
>3add11fa@nap-ns1.netconnect.net.au">news:3add11fa@nap-ns1.netconnect.net.au...
>
>> The jurisdiction comes over interstate traffic and could be used to fund
>> interstate railways if the feds wanted to, like they already fund to the
>> billions to interstate roads.
>
>No dispute that the constitution does allow for it to happen (I have argued
>this here many times before). The problem is that the states do not operate
>an almost monopoly along the roads, they are free to all and sundry, which
>is why the feds are prepared to fund it.
>
>State governments in Australia are not prepared to hand over the rail system
>to the feds and renounce all control over it, but nor are they prepared to
>adequately fund them either. One should really ask why they want to keep
>them if they aren't prepared to fund them appropriately. It seems like they
>want to hold onto them as some sort of vestige of self-control (we all know
>how the current HCA is removing more and more states rights in favour of the
>Commonwealth).
>
>Dave
>
>
Im not convinced that the only model is to hand the whole show over to
the Feds ,(as everyone else seems to beleive) .
Whats really needed is major rail reform , which doesnt also mean
federal control.
What is needed is a single common set of rules which all the Railways
(irrespective of who owns them ) , operate by.
Given that there is a trend now by each State Govt to privatise parts
of its Rail network maybe its possible to head in the direction of the
US rail model.
In this case the only role of the Feds would be to set national
standards, which all rail operators ,either State owned or privately
leased would operate by.
No one can convince me that having separate rules and differant access
regimes and differant safeworking in every state is a good thing for
the country.

How about this as a starter.
1/ The NSW suburban rail network (ie Maitland / Lithgow / Goulburn) be
handed back in its entirety to Cityrail, to be run as a vertically
integrated rail network.
Cityrail in turn must agree to implement a certified publicly
accessable track access regime .
The Feds must agree to build a dedicated goods route thru the suburban
area.

2/ The parts of the National Network in NSW (as defined by the AROU)
be LEASED to ARTC .
ARTC must agree to spend a certain amount of its total income over the
next 5 years fixing up the worst bits of the NSW country network.
The Feds must agree to privatise ARTC .(This is rumoured to happen
anyway after the NRC sale is completed.)
All the States are permitted as a consortium to bid for ARTC as is
anyone else.
The ACCC is given the power to make determinations regarding anti
competetive within the Rail industry.

3/ The sale of Freightcorp be modified to include a 50 year lease on
all the NSW track not defined as being either Cityrails or the leased
ARTC track.
(This would increase the sale price of Freightcorp.).

Eventually we will end up primarily with either a privately owned
national rail network , or a State owned national rail network .
Either way it gets awat from the current problem of each State simply
wanting to play trains in its own state and not caring at all about
the National good.

If and when the above is achieved , then the Feds inject 1.2 billion
into upgrading and improving the worst bits of the Eastern Coast Rail
Network.(They have indicated they will do this , provided that a
single network operator for the national network exists.)


Comments
MD