The week in transport

This is an occasional series, when a few things happen during the week and I want to put a word in…

ABC: Ticket inspectors taking tram user’s phone to seek proof of identity unacceptable, PTV says

This is a concern, but context is important. It’s a matter of degrees. I think whether it’s acceptable or not depends on how they do it.

If the AO has to verify an ID, and no other proof is able to be presented and they say “Hey are you able to show us your name and address from an app, otherwise we’ll have to wait for police to attend”, and the passenger agrees, then I don’t see a big problem with it.

On the other hand, if the AO demands to see it, and/or grabs the phone and/or intimidates the person into logging on, and/or watches them do so (eg observes their pass code) then that’s definitely a problem.

Authorised Officers at a tram stop

Age: Level Crossing Removal Program business case released: the Benefit Cost Ratio (BCR) is 0.78

As the business case documents reveal, the problem is that the standard methodology used for BCRs uses a discount rate that may not be appropriate, and also doesn’t count many of benefits that are commonly associated with level crossing removals.

The core benefits anticipated as a result of the program include travel time savings, reduced vehicle operating costs, road travel reliability benefits, public transport user benefits and avoided collisions. As a standalone program, the LXRP is expected to deliver a Benefit Cost Ratio (BCR) of 0.78 using a 7 per cent discount rate. Using a discount rate of 4%, the BCR is 1.34.

The BCR has been calculated using a standard appraisal methodology. This excludes other significant benefits that the LXRP can be expected to deliver, including:

  • Wider economic benefits (WEBs), such as agglomeration benefits and additional tax revenue from increased
    labour supply, which are expected to be $555 million using a 7 per cent discount rate
  • Additional Benefits – such as improved network resilience to incidents, reduced perceived congestion benefits
    and the related benefits and costs of land use changes occurring as a result of the project – are expected to be
    $175 million using a 7 per cent discount rate
  • Local amenity benefits, increased activity centre connectivity/ consolidation, and benefits for emergency services.
  • Avoidance of wider social impacts (ie. to families and communities) caused by accidents at level crossings

There’s a heap of other interesting stuff in the report… I haven’t read it all yet, though I did find a familiar photo, originally used in this post.

Not hard to see why pedestrians, cars, buses, ambulances get delayed in Clayton. Grade separation needed!

Leader: Westfield Southland shopping centre will introduce paid parking in preparation for the opening of the station.

Charging after 3 hours not unreasonable. As I understand it, at other Westfields such as Doncaster, they charge beyond 3 hours, but you can get parking validated at the cinemas and so on so you’ll still be able to see a long movie and not get charged.

Something had to be done — either a hard limit, or charging — before the station opened, or the shopping centre car park would inevitably fill with commuters’ cars.

Leader: City of Port Phillip is to ban motorcycle parking along parts of Acland Street.

Good. The current laws, which allow motorcycles to be parked basically anywhere on a footpath, are getting out of control. Motor vehicles take up too much space to be allowed in busy pedestrian spaces. Commonsense guidelines are not communicated to riders, and are unenforceable, and thus widely ignored. The lesson for the council here is to ensure that there is plenty of signage for the ban, and that it’s enforced — unlike similar bans in the City of Melbourne.

Age: New Metro train timetables in August.

The government had already announced that V/Line would get a boost. Geelong trains will run every 40 minutes on weekends (currently hourly) should help relieve crowding, though it looks set to mess up bus connections (if they don’t get a wriggle-on and re-write those timetables to match), and really, who decided the non-clockface frequency of 40 minutes is a good idea? Half-hourly would have been better.

The Bendigo and Ballarat lines will also get more services, including an upgrade to hourly on weekends, and there’ll also be more trains to Ararat and Shepparton.

Train arriving at Bentleigh

The Metro changes include an end to the much-hated weekday off-peak Altona shuttles — these will now run all the way into the City. It’s not clear yet whether the Werribee trains will continue to stop all stations, or if these will run express part of the way; otherwise all the stations from Newport in will have 9 trains per hour, which is probably overkill for off-peak.

There will also be a handful of extra peak services on the Craigieburn, Werribee, and Sunbury, though much of the capacity freed up by Regional Rail Link on the latter two will remain unused.

Full details of Metro and V/Line timetables will be released in July.

Which way to the Airport?

(Apologies in advance for the length of this post. It got away from me a bit, but hopefully it’s interesting.)

The debate around a Melbourne Airport rail link has progressed in the past few months, with all sides broadly agreeing it has to happen – the only question is when.

The Coalition and many others say now; the ALP say (assuming the Albion route) it should only happen after the Metro tunnel opens in 2026. Even Melbourne Airport, which famously makes millions from car parking, wants rail access.

(Some say it’s not viable at present, for instance Alan Davies presents these arguments, and he’s posted no shortage of related articles.)

Tuesday’s Federal Budget threw in $30 million of funding for a business case. Undoubtedly it’s a political move to help force State Labor into backtracking, but it may help things progress a little further.

(Is that a lot of money to write a business case? Presumably it can include some very in-depth investigations.)

Melbourne Airport Rail Link. Remember this promise. #SpringSt

What kind of rail link, and why?

Even with the Albion route being the default, it’s worth stepping back and considering why we want it, and what kind of rail link we want to have.

The main reasons for building it are to provide more capacity and consistent travel times as the Airport continues to grow, and the roads around and approaching it get busier. Melbourne is now ranked as the 50th busiest airport in the world, and one of the only ones that big without rail transport.

The capacity advantage of rail is obvious. The current Skybus service, even with 88 seat double-decker buses every ten minutes, is swamped by demand, frequently leaving people behind to catch the next bus. While they can run more buses, given the biggest cost of running an extra service is the driver, there is a limit, and this drives up costs.

Consistency of travel time is the other big problem for Skybus. It frequently gets caught in traffic snarls around the CBD and on the motorway. Longer travel times mean more buses have to be used to maintain the service frequency, preventing higher frequencies.

Congestion could be bypassed by dedicated bus lanes and traffic light priority – in fact this would be the next logical step, before rail. But the government has shown zero indication that it’s interested in providing this – despite the recommendations of its independent umpire on such matters Infrastructure Victoria, which has said that such measures are required.

Melbourne Airport bus. Deliver a high level of onroad priority to bus services linking Melbourne Airport to central Melbourne, including better signalling and managed motorway improvements, over 0-10 years. This will maximise the capacity, efficiency and reliability of these services and defer the need for a more costly investment in a heavy rail line to Melbourne Airport to the 15-30 year period. Upgrading airport bus services will make this mode more attractive for use by employees at the airport and surrounding facilities and for travellers, reducing demand and congestion on the Tullamarine Freeway.

(For years, Skybus prominently advertised its twenty minute travel time. This recently disappeared off their web site — they now say 30 to 45 minutes. It’s unclear if this is a temporary omission during Citylink works, or permanent, in recognition that they often don’t meet it due to traffic congestion.)

There are other advantages to rail, such as ride quality and passenger comfort which are difficult to replicate with buses.

Tullamarine Freeway

The need for speed

What about speed? For rail, this is highly dependent on the route. And while ten years ago I’d have said it has to be 20 minutes from the City, I’m now less sure this is critically important, as the competing modes (private car, taxi) increasingly get caught in a traffic mess of their own making.

This was brought home to me last year when visiting Singapore. To get to the airport, you catch the East-West line to Tanah Merah, and change to a shuttle train the rest of the way. It’s not spectacularly fast, and it’s certainly not faster than driving in uncongested conditions. But it’s incredibly popular, partly because it’s reliable, easy (even with the change of trains; it’s a cross-platform interchange between frequent services) and cheap.

So for Melbourne, I suspect as long as the travel time is consistently 30 minutes or less, it’s probably okay, as long as frequency is high.

Frequency and service span: the 2012 study said departures every 10 minutes, and operations 24 hours a day (presumably frequency reducing overnight, as Skybus does now). I’ve got no argument with that. It’s one of the things Skybus has got right, and the trip much easier than it was when the service was only half-hourly.

Fares: undoubtedly part of what’s holding back public transport mode share (despite Skybus booming, it’s still only 9% percent of airport trips) is the $19 each way price tag, with no discount for return trips, not even same day — so if you want to see somebody off, or meet them, it’s $38 just for your fare. Ka-ching!

For most public transport, the biggest part of the operating cost is the staff. So undoubtedly the bus mode itself, limiting passengers to 88 per bus and driver, is a contributor to the fares.

Even though this is cheaper per kilometre than other Australian airport express public transport, it’s still expensive compared to other local trips – most costing $4.10, including the train plus local bus option to the Airport which takes 3-4 times as long). Some level of premium isn’t unreasonable, but almost five times the price seems excessive, particularly when travelling in a group.

Airport workers can get a discount, rumoured to be in the region of $120 per month.

Sydney’s airport rail link is also quite expensive, but they have a weekly cap roughly equivalent to two trips, so if you’re working there every day, the $13.80 per trip premium for using the airport stations drops to a more reasonable $27.00 per week.

And it seems Sydney’s link patronage is increasing:

So what are some of the options for Melbourne Airport rail?

Suburban trains – some world airport links just use extensions of the regular suburban network. This means carriages not necessarily specially designed for airport travellers, but it may also mean that providing the service is more economically viable, which may result in cheaper fares. (See: Sydney, London Tube, and more recently Dallas and Seattle, and Perth’s link under construction.)

Dedicated trains – often express, and you can have carriages designed for luggage. But very expensive if that’s all the train does, and that can mean limited usefulness for airport workers.

Regional/Interstate trains – some propose diverting the Bendigo line through the airport, or even making it part of an eventual High Speed Rail project. One weakness of these plans (apart from the fact that HSR may never happen) is you could end up with long distance trains serving a busy CBD to Airport route.

It’s the old Sunbury/Swan Hill problem again – before electrification, when Sunbury commuters were served by long distance trains, they packed trains as far as their stop, then left a near-empty train to trundle sometimes halfway across the state to its eventual destination.

Of course it would be possible to run City to Airport-only trains on the same tracks (and would be necessary for a decent frequency), though that might complicate the infrastructure, operations and ticketing.

Singapore Changi airport

Then there’s the monorail/light-rail/standalone shuttle train option, which has come up recently. Two main issues with these: firstly the Citylink contract might trigger compensation if the rail line is something other than part of the suburban network (though I’m sure a clever government could figure out a deal).

Secondly it limits the route’s network connections if it only runs to one CBD station… which depends on the route of course. And the beauty of rail options compatible with the existing suburban rail network is it can run as part of an existing line, and/or feed into the City Loop, increasing one-seat trips and providing more connections.

On the pro side, such a link might well be more affordable and built sooner than heavy rail.

(Extending the route 59 tram to the Airport would be useful for local Airport workers, but far too slow for anybody else.)

Even assuming heavy rail, which route?

As far as routes go, four options were considered by the 2012 study initiated by the Baillieu government.

PTV 2012 airport rail study: shortlisted routes


This is the default (base case) design now planned by the State government. It would see the new line branching off the Sunbury line at Albion, travelling northeast along the existing Albion freight railway corridor (presumably on new tracks) into the airport.

Pros: Would link into the rail tunnel, which means trains from Dandenong would run all the way to the Airport, providing a one-seat ride not just from the City, but also much of the southeast, as well as the CBD, the Parkville hospital and university district.

Cons: A little slow, with a possible travel time from Melbourne Central of about 30 minutes. This is because it would share the line from the City to Albion with other trains.

Still, if you allowed say 20 minutes from the City to Albion (as fast as the existing stopping Sunbury trains), then it shot like a rocket to the Airport along a new line (it’s about 15 km), under 30 minutes should be easily doable.

Costs thrown around seem to be in the billions, which seems very high, despite the relatively short section that doesn’t use an existing alignment. But perhaps that’s the cost of the new (double, electrified) line along that alignment.

The State Government maintains it’s not practical before the metro tunnel opens in 2026, because the City Loop is full. To which I say: if Airport rail is dependent on the tunnel, why not build it in parallel, so both can open in 2026?

Mind you, with some clever planning, in the shorter term Airport trains could probably run direct to Southern Cross, or via the City Loop (with Craigieburn or Upfield trains diverted) until the tunnel is built.

Some argue that the Sunshine to CBD track capacity will be eaten up by the Sunbury and Melton lines by the time the tunnel opens. One group proposes a completely separate line to Sunshine/Albion for it. That could be very pricey, and I think falls into the trap of rejecting incremental changes: theoretically one day the line will be too full (for a few hours a day in peak), therefore we must have an impractically expensive workaround.

Sydney airport train ad at Melbourne Airport

Broadmeadows or Coolaroo suburban line extension:

Until last decade, the popular view was that you could just extend the Broadmeadows line west to the Airport. A reservation had been put in place in the 60s when the Airport was first built.

Pros: cheap. Good for Airport workers living along the existing line. (Remember, this is a substantial number of people, well over 10,000, and they travel to the Airport every day.)

Cons: apparently out of whack with the current Airport masterplan, which assumes rail would come in from the south, in line with the Albion plan.

Slow. Travel time likely to be around 35 minutes. (City to Broadmeadows is 29 minutes, and there’d be almost no opportunity to overtake unless extra tracks were built).

Congestion could be an issue on the existing line; patronage is growing fast.

Finally, the Craigieburn extension (opened in 2007) has put this option in doubt, because if there was a branch off the line, frequencies to the Airport (and Craigieburn) would be halved.

One variation involves diverting the Upfield line through Coolaroo to the Airport.

Dear tourists, sorry, when they say the airport rail link "begins here", they mean in about ten years

Going direct:

Via Highpoint and/or Flemington – the study grouped these separately, but they have similarities. This concept sees a line running more-or-less direct from the Airport, with long tunnels connecting via Highpoint, then either to the existing line at Flemington, or connecting near Footscray.

Pros: quick travel time, assessed by the 2012 study as around 20 minutes, possibly a little slower if there are several stops along the way.

Could provide stations to serve existing destinations such as the very busy Highpoint shopping centre, and proposed housing at Flemington around the racecourse. Perhaps also Airport West shopping centre, and even the new suburb to be built on ex-military land at Maribyrnong, just announced.

Cons: very expensive as it’d need a lot of tunnelling. Track capacity might be an issue at the City end. You could build more tracks, but where would they go in the CBD?

Lots of options

There are numerous options, and variations of each. They all have their pros and cons.

Personally I lean towards conventional suburban heavy rail, linked to the current network, either via Albion or (if we decide to solve north-western suburban issues as well, at additional cost of course) one of the direct tunnelled routes connecting Highpoint.

But ultimately, given widespread agreement that we need an Airport rail link, we as a city need to work out what we want it to do, and how we want it to work.

The perils of comparison studies

On Friday a number of UK publications posted news articles about a Deutsche Bank report saying that London’s public transport fares are the highest in the world.

The comparison was of a monthly public transport pass.

Most of the news reports listed only the top three most expensive cities; London, Dublin and Auckland, and the cheapest: Mumbai.

I wondered where Melbourne ranked. The BBC report was the only one to list beyond the top three; it showed Melbourne at number 9, with a monthly Pass costing £82 (US $106).

It was also the only one to link to the source Deutsche Bank report. The report is not about public transport specifically, it’s about cost of living in numerous categories, in 47 cities. (Note: 47 cities is not the entire world.)

Looking through the Deutsche Bank report, they’d got figures from various places. The public transport fares had come from a web site called Expatistan, which compares cost of living indicators — indeed, Deutsche Bank credits them for most of their pricing data:

Most of our price data is collected from Expatistan ( We would like to give special thanks to the founder Gerardo Robledillo for permitting us to use this data and for assisting us in collating historical data from the website.

Clicking through to have a look at their page about Melbourne, I found they had a monthly public transport pass listed at A$136.

The problem is, this is wrong. A 30-day Pass actually costs $147.60 (excluding the cost of the Myki ticket). It looks like their price is about two years out of date.

Edit: It’s been pointed out that a 28-day Pass is about the right price. But 28 days isn’t a month (usually!)

Expatistan’s information is comprehensive… but it’s also crowd-sourced. This can be problematic — Deutsche Bank notes:

Much of our data is from sources that utilize crowdsourcing techniques to collect and aggregate price data. While this methodology provides them with regular data updates from a large sample, there may be issues with data quality and consistency over time. … Do note thus that prices, changes and ranks should be considered representative with considerable room for measurement and sampling error.

A few clicks and I was able to update the Melbourne price on Expatistan, but it’s not being accepted until I guess others enter the same data.

Trains at Milsons Point station

Sydney was ranked 7th most expensive by Deutsche Bank. Expatistan says it’s A$147, but it’s not clear how this was calculated given there is no monthly pass available. The weekly cap on Opal is A$60, so a monthly cap would be at least $240 for four weeks.

Even the provenance of the London figure quoted in all those articles is uncertain. The Deutsche Bank figure quoted is US$174. The Expatistan figure is UKP £134, which matches the USD figure. But £134 doesn’t match anything on the current official price list – the closest logical match is a zone 1 Monthly ticket, which is £126.80.

Zone 1 only covers central London. The New York City price doesn’t match the official price (USD $121) either, perhaps because it changed in March. But even if it did, that’s not really a valid comparison, as the NYC fare covers the entire subway and local bus network.

So really the fare comparison part of the study is problematic.

Perhaps I’m over-thinking it, but when I did fare comparisons in the past for the PTUA, I went to official sources of fare information, and I was as careful as possible to ensure I was comparing apples with apples.

In this case, the media quotes Deutsche Bank, who used Expatistan, who trust in their users and their algorithms. And data points I’ve checked are wrong, and/or, in my opinion, not equivalent enough to be compared.

The lesson here is: Don’t believe everything you read.

And when a study boldly states a conclusion, do a little digging, to understand how they got there.

State budget 2017

So here we are, state budget day 2017.

A lot of things have already been announced, but they usually leave a few things until the day itself. Nobody was expecting anything huge, as logic would suggest they’d save their money until next year, when there’s an election and they need to dazzle people a bit more. But they might push along with some infrastructure projects that can be under construction by election day in November 2018.

Below I’ve tried to summarise what’s being funded…

Public transport stuff

Night Network made permanent $193m

8 more level crossing removals brought forward (from the list of 50 over 8 years, not a new bunch of 8)

Station upgrades and car parking $9m – it doesn’t go into much detail

Accessibility upgrades at Oakleigh station (regraded ramps and a lift) and Middle Park tram stop (not actually sure which one) converted to an “Easy Access” stop $11m

Extra stabling at Mernda, and land at Broadmeadows for rail power upgrades $11m

10 more E-class trams $218m – at that price, must include additional upgrades for power, stabling?

More train/tram/bus services $62.5m – Werribee an extra 8 services, St Kilda Road tram shuttle (countering the recent removal of route 8?!), additional services for routes 57, 58, 59, extra 401 Parkville shuttle bus services to help during metro tunnel construction. Bus upgrades in middle and outer suburbs (Bentleigh, Frankston, Mordialloc, Narre Warren, Craigieburn, Sunbury and Broadmeadows… hmm, three marginal Frankston line seats, I see).

“Keeping Melbourne Moving” transport network impact management plan $15m

Train stabling at Kananook $187m

Station improvements at Flinders Street, Southern Cross and Richmond $9m. Not sure why this wasn’t included in the funding for Flinders Street refurbishment.

Hurstbridge line upgrade planning $5m

Fix platform gaps, and more TWPS to improve safety $67m

100 new PSOs, and it sounds like they’ll be used for mobile patrols. On trains perhaps?

Extra buses to Fishermans Bend (routes 235 and 237) in peak hour $2m — badly needed, as crowding has reached critical levels


Another 39 V/Locity carriages, and for design work to boost capacity and improve amenity in the V/Locity fleet $311m

Regional/VLine maintenance $316m

Seymour and Shepparton area extra coach and train services $43m

Extra buses for Bellarine, Ballarat, Wallan $4m

Gippsland line upgrades $435m* including some duplication to allow more services

Warrnambool line upgrade $100m*

Surf Coast Railway and Geelong line duplication works $110m* – prepare the corridor and reserve the land, but not actually build anything, it seems?

Bendigo/Echuca upgrades for faster trains and an extra daily service to Echuca, as well as more services to Epsom and Eaglehawk $91m*

Ballarat line $39m* for stage 2 of the upgrade package for trains to Ararat and Maryborough (eg after the stage 1 upgrade, which includes duplication to Melton)

North-east line: upgrades for Donnybrook and Wallan stations and corridor changes to prepare for future standard gauge V/Locity services*

Ballarat station bus interchange $5m

*All these seem to be dependent on Federal funding as part of the asset recycling scheme

Meanwhile on the roads

North East Link $100m planning and preconstruction works funding, but basically locking the project in to happen after 2018.

Mordialloc Bypass $300m, connecting the Dingley Bypass (only recently opened, and already causing increased traffic on South Road) with the Mornington Peninsula Freeway

Yet more ring road upgrades $700m

Monash freeway planning for yet another upgrade $5m

…and a bunch of other stuff, including upgrades in regional Victoria.


Did I miss anything major? Leave a comment.

I’ll read through the numerous press releases and Budget Papers as I get time. There’s usually some interesting stuff on the latest patronage figures.

Overall, even if you leave out the rail upgrades to be funded by the Feds (if they agree to it), there’s plenty there for trains, underscoring their role as the backbone of the public transport network. Some upgrades for trams too. A few upgrades for the bus network, but not a huge amount.

And the question always must be: are they doing enough for public transport to keep up with population growth? And how much are they undermining it by building new motorways?

Here’s the full stakeholder post-budget press conference, courtesy of VCOSS (PTUA’s Tony Morton is on at about the 15 minute mark):

Night Network made permanent

I know I was just writing about Night Network last week, but the news that it’s been made permanent came through over the weekend, so here’s another post on it.

My sons are of the age when they get out and about after dark. Recently one was out at a party in Brunswick until about 1am on a Saturday night, and it was great that he was able to hop on a train with his friends to easily and safely get home.

Late nights like that are behind me. Every month or so I do catch trains home around 10pm or 11pm, but it’s rare that I’m out after midnight.

A short history of Melbourne’s after-midnight PT

I remember a time when (with no money for a taxi) I’d be watching the clock to catch the last train home on a Friday night. During the 70s and 80s, the last trains and trams out of the City were around midnight Monday to Saturday, and around 11:15-11:30pm on Sunday nights.

In May 1993, the state government (under Kennett) introduced Nightrider buses, initially running once an hour along 9 routes, starting at 12:30am, and with a premium fare of $5-7.

The route structure was designed to follow the busiest tram routes in the inner suburbs, and the longer rail lines in the outer. Perhaps this was logical when trying to provide a reasonable network from a very limited budget, but it meant routes were unfamiliar to most people, and some inner suburbs had good public transport access during the day, but no all-night services. This is a problem that plagues Melbourne’s night buses still.

PTV Nightrider map 2015
PTV Nightrider map 2015. The routes were largely unchanged since 1992. Click to zoom.

In 1997, a “NightLink” tram (route 99) was trialled, running on Friday and Saturday nights after midnight, every 20 minutes from the City to Richmond along Swan Street, then via Chapel Street and Carlisle Street to St Kilda, then along the light rail back to the city via Collins Street, and up to Brunswick Street in Fitzroy. (Added following Mike’s feedback. I’d forgotten this one.)

From 2000, Sunday night trains started aligning with Saturdays, with “Bayside” lines frequencies upgraded from 40 to 30 minutes, and last services pushed back from 11:30 to midnight. (Thanks to the rail system being split across two operators at the time, it took some years for all the lines to be upgraded. For a while there, when Christmas Eve fell on a Sunday, patrons at the Carols By Candlelight at the Music Bowl would miss the last train home on the Hillside/Connex lines if they wanted to see the concert finale.)

In 2003/04, despite warnings, most New Years Eve services ran only until 1:30am, with only Nightrider after that, resulting in large numbers of people unable to board the last trams and trains, and resulting in sustained criticism of the state government. They fixed the problem, and all-night services have run on NYE every year since then.

During the 2006 Commonwealth Games, trains and trams were extended to 12:30am each night. NightRider buses ran 7 nights a week; hourly from Sunday to Thursday, half-hourly on Friday and Saturday nights.

In late 2006, the government extended trains and trams to run until 1am on Friday and Saturday nights, finally recognising that more people are out and about late on weekends than other nights.

In 2007, the Nightrider buses, still oddly starting at 12:30am (overlapping with trains and trams), started accepting standard Met fares. Daily fares were adjusted to expire at 3am (eg start your trip by 3am) instead of the old “end of day” time of 2am.

In 2008, the government rebranded and upgraded Nightrider to half-hourly, with first services around 1:30am. This combined with the standard fares finally got patronage taking off, leading to some routes running as often as every 15 minutes during summer to try and reduce overcrowding.

Having lost power in 2010, Labor went into the 2014 election promising “Homesafe”, all-night trains on all suburban routes, six all-night tram services, and 2am coaches to regional cities, which became “Night Network” – implemented from January 2016 pretty much as Labor pledged.

It didn’t come as a complete surprise. Internal planning for the possibility of all-night operation on weekends had been happening for some time. It also resulted in changes to maintenance and upgrade works; many have now moved to weeknights, either after last service or from 9pm, which probably has less of an impact on passengers than weekend nights.

(Despite pre-planning, parts of Night Network may have been implemented in a hurry, resulting in inefficiencies such as some trains spending 50% of their time idle at termini. Ironically, it appears the trams and trains, a network essentially designed by Labor in opposition have been more successful for patronage than the Night Bus network, which was designed by PTV. My view is this is largely because Night Bus routes are completely different to day time routes, thus not well understood by most people.)

On Saturday, the government announced that Night Network has been made permanent, which is great news.

After midnight

After the Things Of Stone And Wood concert a few weeks ago, it was of great comfort to know that there was no rush for the last train — no last train!

The concert in Northcote ended about 12:30am, and we hopped on a tram to the city, then walked down Swanston Street to catch the 1am(ish) train from Flinders Street Station. From 2006 and 2015, this was the last train of the evening.

The 86 tram, 12:40am Saturday morning

Northcote was busy. The tram was busy. The City was busy. Flinders Street Station was busy, with plenty of passengers and also plenty of staff.

All-night public transport has followed the development of the all-night economy, but has the reverse been true as well, with the all-night economy now growing thanks to better public transport access? It’d be interesting to know.

I also suspect it leads to more use of public transport before midnight. Given it was a Friday, I’d been at work before the concert — I knew I didn’t need to go home first and drive to Northcote, because there’d be a way to get home no matter how late it went. (Yes, there’s always taxi or Uber, but part of the reasoning for all-night public transport is that taxis in particular aren’t coping well with demand.)

More broadly, does it encourage some younger people to defer learning to drive and/or buying a car? Quite possibly. The more trips are possible by public transport, the less compelling the expense of driving becomes.

Flinders Street Station, 12:55am Saturday morning

The morning after the Night Network announcement, Radio National aired this interesting program looking at 24-hour cities. They talk about the complexities and benefits of enabling the night time economy.

One of the points they made was that longer licencing hours (and related services) help improve safety because a mass of people don’t all leave venues at once. Senior transport people tell me that in Melbourne, the all-night services have helped in a similar way, reducing the phenomenon of groups of people all waiting around for the first train of the morning. They also tell me there have been no major security incidents since Night Network began.

As I wrote last week, Night Network could be better – the buses run routes completely different to daytime, and it’d be nice if the trains ran more frequently (which would improve their efficiency as well as increasing fare revenue).

But at least now people have the certainty of knowing that it’s a permanent feature of Melbourne’s public transport service. With the right upgrades and promotion, patronage should continue to climb.