Re: Whats happening with the VFT.

["Rod Gayford" <rjaygee@smartchat.net.au>]

Whether the VFT gets the go ahead will depend on whether it is politically
unpalatable to make a decision to build the Badgerys Creek airport. If they
give the VFT the go ahead they can say that the airport need not be
constructed for a while since the VFT will reduce air traffic demand.
Whatever is the most politically convenient.
Cheers
Rod Gayford
Maurie Daly <mauried@commslab.gov.au> wrote in message
mauried.381.385AF1C3@commslab.gov.au">news:mauried.381.385AF1C3@commslab.gov.au...
> In article <385972B3.4EB3E57A@primus.com.au> Richard
<richard_snook@primus.com.au> writes:
> >From: Richard <richard_snook@primus.com.au>
> >Subject: Re: Whats happening with the VFT.
> >Date: Fri, 17 Dec 1999 10:16:03 +1100
>
> >The fate of the original VFT was sealed with hypocrisy fromthe
thenGovernment reagarding TAX offsets..Inits mosybasic
> >form the legislation of the day allowed these concessions toan existing
company..But the then new consortium was
> >requesting this same status, but the Government used some loop hole of
its tax laws to stymie this request.The viability
> >of the original as indeed the present prospect releis tosome degree on
theses tax concessions.
> Stuff snipped.
>
> I think everyone in this country knows about the pathetic attitude of
Govts to
> rail,the more interesting question is why is it so.
> Its clearly not a party thing as both Labor and Liberal are anti rail , or
> more obviously pro road.
> Thru out the world where rail has existed for years especially in Europe
and
> to a lesser extent in the US , Govts are either pro rail, Japan ,
Switzerland,
> France , or have no direct opinion either way , ie the US regime where the
> private sector runs the trains , but the US Govt doesnt seem to be totally
> anti rail,or as pro road as here in Aus.
> (ie the US Govt doesnt tax the Railways to pay for Roads as the Aus Govt
was
> doing .)
> Maybe its because of the way rail started here in Australia, ie State
> owned and operated.
> This is differant to most other parts of the world where in the cases
where
> Govts own or operate trains , its always been the case that one Govt per
> country has been responsible.
> Is Australias rail situation unique in the world, ie State govts running
rail?
> Whilst the Feds rake in so much money from fuel exise they will always be
pro
> road , wouldnt you, when you get a cool $11 billion per annum from mug
> motorists.
>
> Whilst the situation now for rail is a bit better , in that railways only
have
> to pay around 18c per litre in fuel excise, the same as trucks, contrast
this
> to the level of excise on aviation kerosene paid by the aviation industry
of a
> colossal 1.7c per litre.
> Id say if anything that if the Feds are pro road , they are even more pro
> aviation.
>
> cheers
> MD
>