Spot the difference
Left: Victoria. It’s part of the plan.
This is the plan. If you don’t like it, tough, you’ll get what you’re given.
Right: Vancouver, Canada. Be part of the plan.
What do you think? Have your say. Tell us what you want.
Something which I’m hoping the Coalition’s Public Transport Development Authority will resolve is the culture of secrecy that surrounds decision-making in transport. While they do take submissions on some topics, the process that considers them isn’t transparent. The Department of Transport will come out with plans that sometimes make sense, sometimes don’t, but often it will be very difficult to find out why they’ve come to a particular conclusion. It took a lot of digging, for instance, to find out why on earth the South Morang rail extension would cost $562 million for just 3.5 kilometres.
Perhaps the worst case was the now infamous case of the Regional Rail Link plans, which were announced in public to the media and invited guests before the people whose houses would be demolished for it were informed.
In contrast Vancouver’s Translink (which actually manages all forms of transport in Vancouver, not just public transport) actively engages with the public, and even has a public Annual General Meeting where people can come along and ask board members questions — and judging from that post, get meaningful answers.
Now that really would be refreshing.
Did these trains lose Labor the election?
Among the 12 (or more) seats lost by Labor in Saturday’s election were four in Melbourne’s south: Frankston, Carrum, Mordialloc, and Bentleigh.
What do these have in common? The Frankston line.
The Frankston line is the poorest performing in Melbourne. While overcrowding has eased since the June timetable change, punctuality is the worst in the city. In the past 12 months, just 71.2% of trains arriving within five minutes of the schedule. (Network-wide average 85.1%)
One of the causes of this is the extensive use of Siemens trains on the line. These trains have only two doors per side per carriage, and few handholds along the aisles, which causes passengers to congregate around the doors, slowing loading, particularly at peak times.
More critically, an intermittent brake problem means the trains have a 30 km/h limit when approaching a station stop with a level crossing on the far side. By my count, this affects 6 stations from Frankston going towards the city, and 10 going back towards Frankston.
Siemens train brake problems were first reported in 2003, but gained prominence in summer 2006-2007 when a large number of trains were taken out of service because of it. A full solution still hasn’t been found.
The Siemens train problems, combined with the premature scrapping of Hitachi trains as they were introduced, has led to overcrowding and delays.
The Coalition’s David Davis cited the Frankston line as a factor in the swings of bayside seats against the ALP, and one new MP agrees with him:
Ms Wreford says voters in her electorate and the nearby seats of Frankston and Carrum – which also look likely to fall to the Liberals – have had enough of the Frankston railway line which runs through the three bayside electorates. — AAP
And the Herald Sun this morning notes Swinburne University’s Professor Brian Costar:
“It shows that voters see state governments as service providers.”
The failures in public transport were symbolic of a government that had become ineffectual.
“Any Labor member along the Frankston-Pakenham line was in trouble. That was extraordinary. It was the south-eastern suburbs that did Labor in.”
So we have multiple failures with a specific model of train — and indeed a poor choice of model in the first place. They were chosen by National Express, but would have been approved by the Department of Infrastructure (now Transport). Subsequently there’s the placement of many of those trains on the Frankston line, no solution to the brake problems despite seven years having passed, and continuing disquiet over overcrowding and late-running. (And to be fair on Labor, they had started to turn the latter two problems around.)
Add to that a not-necessarily representative, but very alarming recent security incident (and a general concern over security — see: Stateline 19/11), poor decisions and cost blowouts with the new Myki ticket system, frustration from many over station carparks (caused by infrequent buses that aren’t coordinated with the trains), and it’s no wonder that the Coalition’s message, that they would fix the reliability and security problems, and form a Public Transport Development Authority to better plan, manage and coordinate the system, resonated with voters.
What difference would a PTDA make? If it’s done right, it would be staffed by experts who wouldn’t let an operator buy a bung brand of train, nor let a brake problem go unresolved for years on end, nor scrap old but perfectly functional trains when patronage growth had been predicted. It would have powers to ensure bus/train/tram timetables are coordinated. It would do proactive planning and lobbying for funds, at arms-length from government (eg not subject to excessive interference from the politicians, such as Metro recently found when its etiquette campaign, which if successful would have improved punctuality, was deferred by the Minister’s Office due to the election — see Thursday’s Herald Sun print edition: “Stopping all stations, except for manners”). And it would have proper public involvement and transparency, unlike the secret decisions that currently get made behind closed doors.
I’m sure public transport wasn’t the only factor in Labor losing the election, but the message must be that governments have to get basic services right, or face the consequences.
Let’s hope the Coalition get it right.
The election
Elizabeth Miller for Bentleigh. Energy, Trust, Commitment, and Snoopy.
I certainly didn’t expect Bentleigh to go marginal in such a spectacular way. Apparently counting will resume at 4pm, and the result here may well determine the election.
Earlier I spotted a journo and a photographer knocking on Rob Hudson’s door — without success. They then went for a stroll up the street, and were seen photographing (and I assume interviewing) a local shopkeeper.
Interesting times, indeed.
So if we’re now ultra-marginal, when does the pork-barrelling begin? :-)
Update 7pm: The VEC provisional result is the Liberals win the seat. Two-party preferred vote is Libs 15667, Labor 15244.
My assumption is that Rob Hudson lost due to statewide issues, and because of the poor performance of the Frankston line. No other local issues stand out for me, and in fact Labor has been funding school upgrades and the new swim centre. Crime, education, traffic and hospitals aren’t (to my mind) a major concern.
Tags:
9 comments
Voting for PT
So how am I voting tomorrow? No comment.
But I will tell you what I know about the policies on my pet topic:
The Greens, as you might expect, have the best, most comprehensive public transport policy (though it’s not flawless by any means). Of course, we all know they are unlikely to be forming a government next week… though there’s a slim chance they might hold the balance of power, and therefore have a strong influence on policy.
The Libs’ public transport policy is stronger than the ALP’s, by a country mile. Feasibility studies (though not actual construction money just yet) for rail lines to Doncaster, Rowville, Melbourne Airport and Avalon Airport (the latter being a questionable priority), funding for new trains, Southland station, and perhaps most importantly, an independent Public Transport Development Authority to better plan, manage and co-ordinate the whole network. Its independence would allow it to advocate for and implement change at arms length from the politicians.
If the Libs’ policy has a major failing, it’s thinking that putting armed guards onto stations is the best solution to grow patronage at night. Security is an issue, but that’s putting all your eggs in one basket (and is a disproportionate response at most locations), when the biggest problems are a lack of services — making people wait way longer than they’d rather at stations and tram/bus stops. And the Libs are not shying away from the kind of massive road projects that will cut through neighbourhoods, swallowing billions of dollars for little tangible benefit to traffic congestion.
Both the major parties have largely ignored trams and buses. Perhaps this is not surprising, given the profile the train system has in comparison, but it’s short-sighted. Some suburbs of Melbourne will never have trains. It’s therefore critical that tram lines be extended where appropriate, and for other areas, Smartbuses (with the evening and weekend frequencies, and traffic priority all fixed) be implemented.
It’s ironic that Martin Pakula was yesterday talking-up Smartbus, but Labor has no plans for new routes. They are going to fix route 703, which is a Smartbus but doesn’t meet the Smartbus standards.
The ALP’s policy, by the way, isn’t devoid of content. Southland station, more trains to Geelong, lots more station staff, and a (bus, not rail) fix for the very embarrassing Huntingdale/Monash University bus overcrowding problem.
But it’s the Libs’ Public Transport Development Authority that really puts them ahead in this game. If it is implemented properly, with smart cookies on staff and the right powers, it would identify all the shortcomings of the network, seek the funding, then have the ability to fix them, much like VicRoads advocates for the roads it believes should be built.
Of course I don’t expect everybody to consider PT the one thing above all else that determines their vote. But it is clear that this time around, it’s up there as a key issue.
Happy voting. And hope you find a good sausage sizzle!
- PTUA Election Scorecard: Greens A, Labor C, Liberal/National B
- Herald Sun today: Main parties lead commuters up a dead end
Thursday morning on the Frankston line
This morning on the Frankston line…
Election stunt?
The latest Metro Trains Authorised Officer uniforms?
Year 12s last day/Schoolies celebration?
Is there a Flashmob happening somewhere this morning?
Or is it just the latest fashion?
I wonder where they keep their Metcards/Mykis?
(Caption on their bums: MorphSuits.com)
Sunset over Melbourne
Taken from Deck 10 at the Adelphi Hotel at a friend’s birthday party a couple of weeks ago.
Tags:
4 comments
The importance of context (even on Twitter)
I’m not having a go at anybody in particular here, but making a point.
I tweeted what I thought was an amusing comment from someone I don’t always find myself in thorough agreement with, Roads Minister Tim Pallas:
Tim Pallas’s pledge: “I will never, ever, wear lycra in public.” http://j.mp/9Z9zlB #vicvotes — danielbowen
A couple of people re-tweeted it, with this one adding a comment.
RT… @danielbowen Tim Pallas: “I will never, ever, wear lycra in public” http://j.mp/9Z9zlB #vicvotes WTF is wrong with Lycra?! FO Tim
You know, I think before you blast someone’s comment (apart from the fact that it was clearly meant to be taken in jest), you might want to read the context by following the link provided. Here’s the full paragraph:
While some people look good in lycra, It is perhaps appropriate here that I reiterate my pledge to the Victorian people that I will never, ever, wear lycra in public.
So in fact Pallas didn’t say anything was wrong with lycra. He just made a funny, self-deprecating comment that he shouldn’t wear it.
Foolishly I decided to point this out to the Tweeter:
Maybe you should read the full quote?
…and got this response back:
I did and the issue isn’t even worth answering. It just gives credence to the doped on the other side.
Does that actually make any sense? I’m seeing words there, but I can’t comprehend the meaning.
I didn’t bother taking it any further.
But my point is that while I love using Twitter, the brevity of messages shouldn’t be an excuse for wilfully ignoring context, nor blasting away with both barrels when you make an assumption as a result of that lack of context, particularly when the link to all the information is merely a click away.
- 20/4/2010: This makes no sense
- 18/2/2010: Healthy debate needs truth
- 26/10/2009: Making your argument count
Domain Registry of America/Domain Renewal Group – scammers
If you have your own internet domain name, you may have come across the Domain Registry of America (DROA), also known as the Domain Renewal Group.
They’re a bunch of scammers who regularly and repeatedly send out letters which look like an invoice for a domain name, but are in fact custom advertisements for overpriced online services. If you blindly follow the form and send them money, you’ll transfer your domain name over to their registry, and pay a handsome amount for doing so — almost certainly more than you were already paying.
Their carefully worded FAQ (which is similar to the letters) tries to make out that at US$30/A$45 per year, they are cheap. They’re not. There are any number of domain registrars that will register a .com domain name for around US$10 (at the moment about A$10) per year — or even less.
So you might as well just chuck any letter from DROA into the bin.
Or, I pondered, could you go and harass them in person? You see, I noticed one of their offices is here in Melbourne: “189 Queen Street #209″ — that’s US-speak for “unit 209″.
So I went along to see if I could find it.
I had a good look around, and couldn’t actually find number 189. There is an optometrist, which is supposedly 185-191. Next door to that is a Medina Serviced Apartments building, with no street number on it. I thought this might be number 189 (I checked later and found that it is indeed) so I went and looked inside. According to the list in the lift, there is no unit 209. There’s not even a level 2, unit 9 — levels 2-5 are the carpark. So it doesn’t seem to be there.
185-191 is on a corner. I checked around the corner (in Little Bourke Street) for another entrance. I didn’t find one, but it’s notable there there’s a business centre there, though it has a Little Bourke Street number. Peeking inside the window, I did note that their letterboxes are numbered from 201, and there is a 209. I wonder if that’s them? Looks like it — a commenter here reckons he was directed from the Medina to the business centre.
So, 189 Queen Street #209 clearly doesn’t exist. Which is no surprise really — like I said, the whole thing’s a scam.
