RE: Question about Victorian government & PT in Melbourne

[Vaughan Williams <ender2000@MailAndNews.com>]

>I have a couple of questions regarding public transport policy and
>legislation in Victoria, which I am sure the more politically interested
>participants of this newsgroup could answer.

Will do my best....

>* The current party standings in the Legislative Assembly of the Victorian
<snipped>
>pass a Bill into law. My question regarding this issue is thus - is the
>current Bracks ALP Government only governing within the framework of the
>legislation passed by Kennett? Has any legislation - not just legislation
>relating to transportation - been passed since September 1999?

Nope. Plenty of legislation has been passed. The government can't just ram 
it 
through, though - it needs to consult with the independants to even get it 
through the lower house, and it only passes the upper house if the 
opposition 
is prepared to support it.

>* What is the name of the Act of Parliament which gave Kennett's Government
>the right to enter into contracts with private enterprise to provide public
>transportation services to the Victorian travelling public? I would like to
>read it in detail should I ever have the disposition.

Don't remember. I suspect its the Transport Act, does anyone know?

The contracts are online, but are almost unreadable because theyre broken up 
into several PDF files with no effective index, and all the interesting 
parts 
have been taken out as commercial in confidence.

>* Can these contracts be amended during the term of the contract
>unilaterally by the Bracks Government, or must the current Government wait
>until the contracts (with ten year terms, if this writer recalls correctly)
>have expired to impose new terms on the contract holders?

12 - 15 year terms. The answer to this isn't a simple one. The government 
has 
more flexibility than it lets on, and it also has a lot of levers available 
to 
it should it want to negotiate with the operators. The government can, for 
example, say "you are going to upgrade 20 more Premium Stations" and the 
only 
response the operator can come back with is "fine, but youre paying for it". 
The operator will then try to rip the govt off in the process and there will 
be argy bargy about how much it really costs. Unfortunately, the govt is 
lazy 
and is allowing itself to be ripped off and in some cases approaching 
outright 
fraud (eg. the 100 tram conductors being used as ticket inspectors)

>* Is it possible at all under the current public transport contract régime
>to bring public transport services back into state ownership?

Yes. The State has virtually unlimited legislative power - how did you think 
Kennett got away with everything he did? They could - provided they could 
get 
it through the upper house - legislate the contracts out of existance and 
confiscate all the infrastructure. Whether thats a viable option is another 
matter (it would be the most outrageous government proposal since Jack 
Lang).

>* Who is responsible for the policing of the contracts, and what can happen
>if it is proven that a private public transport operator wilfully breached
>its contract with the State Government?

The Director of Public Transport is *supposed* to be responsible for this, 
with the assistance and advice of the Public Transport Customer Consultative 
Committee. This process is completely dysfucntional and the DPT is not doing 
his job, and the PTCCC is ineffective and is not listened to or taken 
seriously by either the department or the operators. I feel qualified to 
make 
this comment, because I am on the PTCCC. In theory, the DPT can fine the 
operator or even (for a serious breach) pack them up and send them home. In 
practice, on the most charitable view, the DPT doesn't have the resources to 
adequately police what the operators are doing or enforce the contracts.

There are also many important areas where there are loopholes in the 
contract 
you could drive a truck through that favour the operators. The DPT and PTCCC 
are supposed to have the power to make recommendations beyond mere 
enforcement 
of the contracts, but the DPT isn't at all interested in dealing with things 
that aren't in the contracts. He's what the Consumer Law people call a 
"contract administrator", not a "regulator".

Breaches of the Charter on which the DPT has done nothing include:
* Illegal reduction in services on Collins St by Yarra Trams
* Unilateral withdrawal of Camberwell Shopper by Connex
* Astronomical increases in V-Line fares
* Illegal reduction in services by Swanston Trams
* Numerous timetable changes without consultation
* Compensation Code limited to Monthly and Yearly tickets

Hope that answers your questions.

Vaughan

Vaughan Williams
Secretary
Public Transport Users Association
247 Flinders Lane
Melbourne 3000
http://www.ptua.org.au