A Promise he won't Forget

Politicians break promises all the time.

Big ones, small ones, implied ones, core and non-core promises - they all get broken.

Some get broken because circumstances change. Some get broken because they are no longer feasible. Still others are broken because the person or party who made them knows that no one really cares whether it is kept or not.

Some broken promises have little or no consequence, and certainly no negative result for a government.

Core and non-core promises. Photo from here

Others can have such long-reaching consequences that the very sanity of the person breaking it has to be questioned.

Sometimes this is undeserved. Perhaps the original promise has been mischaracterised, or the perhaps media's narrative makes the promise into a defining characteristic of a politician when it had no business being any such thing.

The obvious example is Gillard and the Carbon Tax. No matter what she achieves for the rest of her time as Prime Minister, whether that be for another 18 months or 18 years, it seems likely that the title of her biographies will involve a none-too-subtle pun on the Carbon Tax. It was a single, stupid sentence on a breakfast TV show at the end of a gruelling campaign, but it has coloured the entire country's perception of her.

O'Farrell has broken a heap promises in his time, and Labor has tried to convince the public that he has broken a whole lot more.

Many of those promises are so inconsequential that he would be almost crazy not to break them.

Others are big, but don't seem to have gained much traction to date.

This most recent effort, however, is a true whopper.  And, worst of all (at least for him) there is going to be an ever present reminder of what a dumb decision he has made.

He may want to be the infrastructure premier, but if he goes about it like this then all the pain of finding money to build this network is going to be for naught.

O'Farrell campaigned hard on the North West Rail Link (NWRL) during the election. And he was right to do so - the present arrangements (tollways, large numbers of buses, constantly shifting bus-lanes, seemingly ever-present road work) is, and always was, at best a stop-gap. Heavy rail to the North-West was the only solution that was going to satisfy the new residents pouring into the area.

Just one of the hundreds of articles on the topic. Original story here

As late as yesterday, the promise that there would be direct services to the city was still on the a NSW government website promoting the line. Unsurprisingly, Penny Sharpe, Shadow Minister for Transport, had one of her minions quickly grab a screenshot before it disappeared

Today, the offending paragraph is missing

This new plan is going to make no one happy. And while it is being built, and every day it exists until the new harbour crossing is built in about 2089 (or so) it will remind the population about a promise broken.

The map at present

The original plan was for the NWRL to join up with the network at Epping (top middle), head down the new line to Chatswood (top right), and then into the city. That was the only way it could work financially - I don't think anyone was seriously suggesting that the line should connect any nearer to the city - the price-tag was already eye watering, and connecting closer to the city would increase the cost several times over.

The obvious problem that raises is that the North Shore line is a crowded one - and one where capacity cannot be increased much more. For safety reasons, there is a limit on how many trains can head across the Harbour Bridge in an hour - and we are pretty much already at that limit.

In other words, for every NWRL heading across the bridge during peak hour, a North Shore service would need to be cancelled.

Now, that problem can be partially alleviated by the fact that many people who would usually get a North Shore Service from a station south of Chatswood could hop on a NWRL service.

But, as I type this blogpost sitting on a North Shore train, I can assure you that many, many people get on North Shore trains well north of Chatswood.

Moreover, under current population planning for Sydney, councils have had to find space for new residents.  At least on the North Shore, they have been finding that space by cramming apartments blocks in and around the train line. As those block are completed, even more people are going to be heading to the station to get to work.

This is not a new problem. It has been plainly obvious ever since the line was announced.

Presumably the O'Farrell government decided that it was all too hard. We haven't yet heard accusations of O'Farrell favouring the residents of his seat (a seat which covers just about every North Shore Line station north of Chatswood, but it surely won't be long.

So what is the government's new plan? The NWRL will simply be a shuttle running between Rouse Hill and Epping.

It's an awful plan. First of all, this may deal with the problem of having to squeeze the NWRL services over the bridge - but how does O'Farrell think these people are going to get to the city? They will need to hop onto a train heading to the city via Chatswood. More services will HAVE to be put on to deal with the extra passengers.

True it is that the new plan includes a new line a few km east of the North Shore line to scoop up some areas not presently served, and plans for the much needed new harbour crossing. But these plans are over a decade in the future. Construction of the NWRL will begin during this term. Heaven knows how many terms it will taken for this new harbour crossing to move off the plans into the real world.

Photo by @sarethebear, the ABC's new NSW politics reporter

Of all the options available to O'Farrell, short of cancelling the NWRL altogether, it appears to be worst one possible.

But there can be no doubt - none whatsoever - that this broken promise is going to be one that that he is never allowed to forget. Whether he'll be forced to regret it will probably depend on whether his opponents can lift their game and make some criticism stick.

Plans on Track

I never normally pick up an MX magazine.  It is almost universally filled with the very worst kind of "news" - celebrity rubbish, trivia and "reporting" that consists of ripping meaningless stories of the internet.

And as for the letters page - suffice to say that it is the dumbest letters page in Sydney, and THAT is saying something.

The only redeeming feature is the overheard section, which is usually pretty funny.

The only time you'll ever spot anything resembling actual journalism is in relation to transport announcements, which, given that MX is predominantly handed out at stations to consumers, makes sense.

Anyway, when I saw this head line yesterday, I thought I had better grit my teeth and grab a copy.

The story was as follows: 

Now, in fairness, this is an announcement of plans, nothing more. The ALP government was famous for announcing a new project and then, when it became apparent that it was going to be politically inconvenient or merely that it was going to cost money, promptly shelving or cancelling the project.

Some projects were even reannounced over and over, as it the public didn't notice that they were being taken for a ride.

Having said that, the fact that the government kept getting re-elected seemed to suggest that perhaps the public hadn't noticed, but I suppose that's a different conversation.

This announcement, however, shows the government demonstrating foresight and planning.  It appears that there is presently little need for such a link, but it is not inconceivable that there may be such a need in the future.

Sydney Train Map at present

The North West Rail link is going to head more or less North West from Epping Station, which you can see at the point where the red line meets itself just above the middle of the map. It heads right into the heart of the major growth area of Sydney.

The train system as it presently stands is overwhelmingly geared towards getting people to and from the city.  The plans to try and diversify some employment out of the city is not going to work unless people are able to get to these locations other than via the city.

Once the North West Rail Link is operational, the commuters will have a way to get to and from the city.  But as the areas populate people will be wanted to get to Western Sydney. There are growing city centres around Parramatta and Penrith that will need to be serviced.

In the same way, the growing population in the North West will no doubt lead to an explosion of jobs in the area, and the workers who don't already live in the area will need to get there somewhere.

The proposed route will result in a line heading from the last North West Rail Link station to connect up with either Schofields or Riverstone, which can be seen 7 and 8 stations south-east of Richmond, the station in the top left of the map. It will create a sensible and, I have no doubt, very useful route for commuters travelling in that direction.

In fact, if you look at the below map, if would seem silly not to connect the two together in due course. Schofeilds can be see just to the west of the end of the North West Rail Link at Cudgegong Rd.

We do need to keep things in perspective - all that's been done is set aside the land.  The real test will be whether the government releases the land after the first call from a developer suggesting they may pay a little more for this or that block if they released the land.

But it is an important first step towards making sure that our rail system is able to effectively and efficiently move people around this city.  If the city is going to grow, and particularly if the North West is going to accept as many new residents as are presesntly planned, this kind of forward planning is essential.

Here's hoping O'Farrell has the courage to stick to this plan when it actually requires a "price" to be paid.

Accessing the Anger?

Some people will say we shouldn't be surprised. They are a Liberal government, after all.

Could O'Farrell really be planning to fund the North West Rail Link through an "access fee"?

Earlier today the Hills Transport Group put out a press release that quoted RailCorp CEO Rob Mason as saying in a memo that "a private sector entity will design, construct, commission, operate and maintain the North West Rail link... for a period of 20 to 30 years." The press release goes on to explain that this will operate under an "access model".

In plain English, that means that there will be a special station surcharge for travel on the line, similar to the hated Airport Link surcharge.

As a caveat, I should say that there has been no formal announcement or acknowledgment from the government.  O'Farrell may deny any such plans, and it will be anyone's guess whether he has had a quick change of heart or whether Mason was speaking out of turn.

But the plan really does seem crazy.  Ridiculous, unbelievable, hubris-fueled crazy.

The North West is Sydney's biggest growth area.  These people need access to public transport, as the constantly worsening traffic chaos on the major feeder roads attests.

This is why the North West Rail Link is essential if Sydney is to manage its growth.  A government cannot simply keep releasing more and more land to developers and not build heavy rail to get these people around. It should have been built by now, but we can't blame the Coalition for that.

Map of the proposed route.  Taken from the line's website

To be fair, it is true that a privatised line would be cheaper for the government (and, therefore, the people). The government should spend our money carefully, and if there is a cheaper and equally effective way to move people around then it should be investigated.

Equally, I'm a believer in user pays, to a point.  Tolls on roads are appropriate if the tolls are used to fund said roads.  There is no particular reason to encourage people to drive, and anyone who lives in the North West and drives to the city for work knows what they are signing on for.

Rail, however, should be encouraged (and yes, subsidised) by government.  Rail is cheaper, it is better for the environment, it takes up less space, it is clean and it is far more expandable. We cannot just keep jamming more roads and tunnels into our city - we need a good network that grows as the city grows.

While a private model would cost less money up front, under an access model the people who use the line would simply make up the difference.  In other words, the private model would shift the cost away from the rest of the state and towards those people who will actually use the line.

On the surface, that makes sense.  They're getting the benefit, right?  No.

Those people who get the train stay off the roads.  Their polluting cars stay in the garage.  The fuel they would buy stays in the bowser. More bridges, tunnels and parking lots stay on the drawing board. The CBD is that little bit nicer, less crowded, and easier to get in and out of.

Moreover, people suddenly have good reason to live in the North West, knowing that they will have a way to get to work.  The rest of Sydney will have a little less pressure to grow and shoe-horn in even more people.

The rest of Sydney has access to heavily subsidised public transport.  Why do those in the North West deserve any less?

This revelation is particularly surprising in light of the Infrastructure funding models that I wrote about less than a week ago.  In that interview O'Farrell explained quite clearly the value of doing things the "hard way". He was right.  The North West Rail Link needs to be built, and he needs to find some other way of paying for it.

Public transport (and particularly heavy rail) is the skeleton on which a city is built. And, like an animal without a good skeleton, a city without a good skeleton is liable to collapse.

Putting a massive surcharge onto the line to fund it will simply mean far, far less people will use the line.  They will keep driving and paying those tolls because, suddenly, the train trip isn't as economical as it was.  

The North West Rail Link has the potential to be O'Farrell's greatest achievement in government.  It was one of the key promises that got him elected.

If he blows it by making it horrendously expensive to use, I have no doubt he'll not be allowed to forget it.

UPDATE.  The Herald and the Telegraph both have stories about this today.

Additionally, O'Farrell responded on twitter late last night:

Train of Thought

Arguably the Coalition's biggest election promise (and certainly the biggest infrastructure promise) was to build the North West Rail link.


It is an enormous project with an massive price tag for any State Government.  That said, it is one of those projects that just has to happen if Sydney is going to handle its population growth in a sustainable, sensible way.


The problem is less obvious when you view the Sydney train map as we usually see it:

Of course, the train map looks nothing like that in real life:

Picture from Wikipedia

The most important map, though, is this one:

That map is taken from Labor's Metropolitan Transport Plan. The most important things to note are the North West and South West Growth Centres.


The government has asked all local councils to accept additional residents by rezoning.  Those that cannot be fit into present developed areas will have to go somewhere.


Of course, whether Sydney should be allowed to grow in this way is another discussion that should be had, but lies somewhere beyond the scope of this post.


It is pretty obvious that the South West Rail link will be needed to service the South West Growth Area.  The route can be seen on this map, marked in black on the bottom left, and it is expected to be completed in 2016:

The North West Rail link is not only needed to service the North West Growth Area, but also to give people in the North West an option for getting to the city other than the M7, M2, and Lane Cove Tunnel.


Driving to the city from these areas is very expensive, which would not be a problem if there was a reliable, frequent, late-running train service, which of course there is not.


The other obvious gap in the map is the train line to the northern beaches, but that appears to be off everyone's radar at the moment.


I had planned to write here about the long history of rail lines promised for the North West, but franly the history is too sordid and confusing.  Suffice to say that if you would like to be walked through the Labor Government's inablity to accomplish anything substantive in this area then the Wikipedia will explain it all.


Of course, Labor did deliver the Chatswood-Epping connection. That said, this was originally meant to be the Parramatta-Chatswood connection, and was completed at a cost way above the original budgeted cost for the Parramatta-Chatswood plan.


The problem is not of O'Farrell's making. In fact, the Labor government that preceded his is not entirely to blame either.  Bradfield laid the plans for Sydney's train system.  The plans were visionary - the problem is that over 100 years later Sydney has outgrown those plans.  

Sydney's train lines in the late 1800's

For years we have desperately needed a government that was able to make a plan, commit to it, provide funding and ensure that Sydney had room to grow.


Of course, as history shows, the Labor government's fixation on roads meant we now have a pretty good road system.  Admittedly it costs a bit to use it, but we got roads that the government could never afford to have build (or so they say). I, for one, have no trouble with a portion of user pays on our roads.


By contrast, train lines will inevitably need to be subsidised by the government as commuters will usually not pay enough to cover costs. 


But train lines offer a potential for growth that roads do not. One only need to look at cities like Los Angeles to see the consequences of failing to provide good, efficient and affordable public transport.


Buses, especially in the North West and the Northern beaches have partially filled the void.  But buses have a limited capacity - many people avoid them because they are irregular, unreliable, and often stop running an inconvenient times.


This story published today in the SMH that the planners are reconsidering the location of the stations.


This is appropriate - whilst I have no doubt that many people have been complaining about the time it is taking to "turn the first sod", it is essential that a little time be taken to get things right the first time.


A well planned, efficient train system is vital to a thriving city - and this process is part of planning things out in a sensible fashion.


As someone who works in the Sydney CBD and catches the train every day, I shudder to imagine what Sydney would look like if we did not have the train system that we do.


But train systems require constant re-investment if it is to cope with the inevitably uneven population growth.


For decades now Sydney has not had the benefit of decisive planning and investment in the train system. If O'Farrell really does achieve his stated objective of being the infrastructure premier, then Sydney will have the benefit of his political courage for decades to come.

If not, then he will join a long list of premiers who promised big and failed to deliver.