Re: Brisbane Light Rail Proposals

["Garry R. Ford" <garry@merddyn.apana.org.au>]

fergusor@scanet.com.au wrote:

> Whilst I certainly share your enthusiasm for private sector involvement in
> public transport projects, I find it quite unfair that public transport
> projects should only proceed if they are found to be 'economic'.

I think you have misunderstood the criteria that are used to determine whether a
PT system is economic. I did not mean the dry economic rationalist approach
adopted by Ketaing Labor and Howard to a lesser extent.

What is meant is that when the overall varaiables, including environmental,
traffic congestion, and other such almost intangibles, are factored into the
economic equation, if it still proves "uneconomic" then it won't proceed. Even if
it is operated by PE there will be "hidden" government subsidies as now happens
with both public and private bus operations and even the railways. These are
called Community Service Obligations (CSOs).  Well that's the Qld approach in any
case.

Its the governments role to work out how much CSOs have to  be paid and then PE
to decide that it is economic with that amount of subsidy or not.  CSOs could
include monies saved on not having to construct additional road works or provide
for polutiion control as the polution has been decreased by using light rail.

The most intangible is savings in travel time being passed on to businesses and
people.  That has to be countered against increased productivity, and resulting
increases in taxation revenues as a result.

I hope thgis explains what is meant.

Cheers

Garry