Public Transport Victoria forum hears call for more Maryborough train services
State Government Commits to Developing Rail Infrastructure for Victoria
Horsham residents to be quizzed about future use of dormant rail corridor land
No choppers here: Malcolm Turnbull takes the train to Geelong
Opposition Leader Matthew Guy backs Melbourne Airport rail link
Jail time for train threats to Vline Staff
Premier Daniel Andrews hears efforts to address Central Goldfields disadvantage, push for more Maryborough trains
The Inland Rail Link Melbourne to Brisbane a Similar Case as the RAA's Bendigo - Geelong Rail Link
North-West Rail Alliance urges more council support amid push for return of Mildura passenger rail
Grampians Rail Trail: Shire calls for community to step up and manage facility
Politicians love to tempt us with visions of faster trains. The Victorian and federal governments want to fast-track transport projects to revive the economy from its COVID-19 slump. Fiscal stimulus that includes infrastructure spending may be the right prescription. But should that extend to regional rail plans hatched before the pandemic?
The federal government has pledged to create a fast rail link between Melbourne and Geelong.CREDIT:JOE ARMAO
Faster regional trains were never likely to take much pressure off Melbourne, nor revitalise regional cities and towns. And a new Grattan Institute report shows that that’s even more true now. There are better ways to spend taxpayers’ money, and the label of "fiscal stimulus" is not a licence to abandon cost-benefit discipline.
The federal government is overseeing the business case for high-speed rail between Melbourne and Shepparton, and has already committed $2 billion to upgrade the Melbourne to Geelong line. The Commonwealth and Victorian governments are funding business cases for upgrades to the lines to Albury-Wodonga and to Traralgon.
One argument for these upgrades is that they'll take pressure off Melbourne by enabling people to live elsewhere while keeping their city job. Another is that they'll boost jobs and tourism in the regions. Neither argument stands up well to scrutiny.
Geelong is the regional city with the most Melbourne commuters, at 14,000. Melton has 15,000, although it’s often considered part of Melbourne. After that there’s daylight before the next largest region, of Gisborne and Macedon, with about 5000 Melbourne commuters between them.
It might sound as though Geelong could be a great place for Melburnians to move to, while still keeping their current jobs. But a faster train service isn’t likely to have much impact. That’s because people who currently live in Geelong and commute to Melbourne mostly don’t take the train – and that isn’t likely to change.
About a quarter of Geelong’s 14,000 Melbourne commuters get to work by public transport. Once you factor in that many workplaces outside the CBD have free parking, and some people have tools and equipment to carry, it’s no surprise that people coming in from Geelong tend to drive.
The overwhelming majority of commuters who do take the train from Geelong to Melbourne work in the CBD. There are 3400 of them. But even if a faster train service encouraged another 3400 Melbourne residents to move to Geelong but keep their city job, that would account for just 3 per cent of Melbourne’s population growth last year. It’s far too small a number to have an impact on population pressures in Melbourne.
Meanwhile, parts of metropolitan Melbourne remain very poorly serviced by public transport. It can take more than an hour to get to the CBD from Frankston, Pakenham, Berwick and parts of Casey. More people would benefit from fixing black spots in Melbourne, such as Manningham, Knox and Keilor.
The other argument for regional rail upgrades is that they will boost the regions; that faster trains to Melbourne would mean more jobs in towns such as Shepparton, Wodonga and Traralgon. But faster passenger rail is a puny force to pit against 100 years of relentless urbanisation. The best evidence suggests that Melbourne would be more likely to gain than the smaller towns, not vice versa. That’s what happened in France: the high-speed rail network benefited the second-tier cities of Lyon and Lille at the expense of surrounding towns, but it was the capital city of Paris that gained the most.
This article first appeared on www.theage.com.au
About this website
Railpage version 3.10.0.0037
All logos and trademarks in this site are property of their respective owner. The comments are property of their posters, all the rest is © 2003-2020 Interactive Omnimedia Pty Ltd.
You can syndicate our news using one of the RSS feeds.