Re: Road and Rail Funding (was Re: Bugger all express services on Hillside Trains)

[David McLoughlin <davemcl@REMOVEiprolink.co.nz>]

Anthony Morton wrote:

> This year the money is to be spent on a whole swag of projects including the
> Eastern Freeway extension to Ringwood and the Hallam Bypass.  This is an
> election year in Victoria and new roads are regarded as vote-winners in a way
> that rail projects are not.  (Never mind what the community thinks.)  

Well, clearly the majority of the voting community are happy with the
way money is spent on roads. Think about it. Otherwise politicians would
spend a lot more money on public transport. They spend taxpayers' money
where the opinion polls they take show the largest number of votes are.

> What I'd like to see is a big balance sheet showing on one side all revenue
> collected from motorists at all levels (federal, state and local) and on the
> other side all motoring-related expenditure at all levels.  Then we could do
> the same for rail transport.  Only then can this question of who gets what
> be decided.

Yes, I think that would be a very good idea and might lead to a fairer
share of revenue going to public transport.

I support both adequate roads and adequate public transport. Sadly, 95pc
of the money goes to roads in both Australia and New Zealand. 
Public transport is seen as a drain on public funds. Roads cost vastly
more than buses, trains and trams, but apart from those who object to
paying tolls (IMO the way new roads should be funded), hardly anyone
objects to the cost of roads.

David McLoughlin
Auckland New Zealand