It's behind a paywall, but I suspect it might be interesting reading:

It's behind a paywall, but I suspect it might be interesting reading:

Isn't it already in disarray ? Might help it to have a change.

Not sure a whole new board will be able to change that much at all. Better off to start from scratch, and have a big old citizens jury to make recommendations to the various relevant layers of government on how to provide better public transport to regional Victoria. Members would be a representative sample of the Victorian population writ-large, and the body could be retained as a consultative body once various different structural reforms and recommendations have been implemented. They would also obviously advise on the direction of V/Line and other regional fast rail proposals forming part of a collaborative design process that may be able to improve regional planning of transportation services in an actually integrated manner (very little integration occurs at the moment despite the presuppositions of the Transport Integration Act having been around for 11 years now!!).

If it’s successful could be rolled out to metropolitan Melbourne. If it is successful, you could rolls it out in other jurisdictions. This proposal is one step short of full democratisation of the V/Line Board and management because the Australian political elite is likely to find full public discretion on the operation of public transport services to be unpalatable

I should also say: neither privatisation, prior nationalisation, nor government corporatisation have delivered good services to regional Victoria. So clearly we can’t try and privatise it again, nationalisation didn’t make it better run, and improvement since V/Line found its way back into public hands has been incremental at best.

It is arguable that more improvements could’ve been done had it not been for the pervading economic zeitgeist of the neoliberal economic period — but that won’t make things better now.

I think this dual process of semi-democratisation and semi-devolution could really herald a new era in Victoria. For so long we’ve been one of the most, if not the most centralised state in all of Australia (ACT is a territory). There is a huge urban/rural divide that has been widening for many years, and this simply is no longer acceptable. The UK is instructive of what happens when you ignore these regions and focus solely on people not places — but I think we should avoid that (if we can!).  If we allow for even just a minor forum to open up in which the regions are able to express to Melbourne what it needs, then perhaps there hope yet for radical reform! Why not try and take inequality in say... the Latrobe Valley head-on for once, whilst also letting these communities have a say in the direction they want to go, rather then imposing upon them from Spring Street? Both sides in Victoria are guilty of letting regional VIC go backwards in inequality — now is the time to change the narrative!

V/Line is an agency of the state government, so I presume this "board" being spoken of is in fact the Cabinet?

Which two Ministers have resigned?

The VLine board was largely changed in 2015 after the ALP won the State Election. But all the recent revelations are demonstrating it's been a rough gig.

V/Line Board in disarray? Did they get a new member who knew something about running trains? That would really put the cat among the pigeons.

I should also say: neither privatisation, prior nationalisation, nor government corporatisation have delivered good services to regional Victoria. So clearly we can’t try and privatise it again, nationalisation didn’t make it better run, and improvement since V/Line found its way back into public hands has been incremental at best.

It is arguable that more improvements could’ve been done had it not been for the pervading economic zeitgeist of the neoliberal economic period — but that won’t make things better now.

I think this dual process of semi-democratisation and semi-devolution could really herald a new era in Victoria. For so long we’ve been one of the most, if not the most centralised state in all of Australia (ACT is a territory). There is a huge urban/rural divide that has been widening for many years, and this simply is no longer acceptable. The UK is instructive of what happens when you ignore these regions and focus solely on people not places — but I think we should avoid that (if we can!).  If we allow for even just a minor forum to open up in which the regions are able to express to Melbourne what it needs, then perhaps there hope yet for radical reform! Why not try and take inequality in say... the Latrobe Valley head-on for once, whilst also letting these communities have a say in the direction they want to go, rather then imposing upon them from Spring Street? Both sides in Victoria are guilty of letting regional VIC go backwards in inequality — now is the time to change the narrative!

I thought that Geelong was already running the show so far as public transport is concerned.

The VLine board was largely changed in 2015 after the ALP won the State Election. But all the recent revelations are demonstrating it's been a rough gig.

Seemed like a good gig for those involved but a rough gig for the travelling public and especially for rail freight.

V/Line is an agency of the state government, so I presume this "board" being spoken of is in fact the Cabinet?

Which two Ministers have resigned?

It's hard to tell on Railpage how seriously to take posts, but I'll play a straight bat.

No, it's not the Cabinet. V/Line, like most commercial government bodies, is set up as a statutory corporation. Its governance is modelled after a private corporation; it is run by a CEO under the direction of a board chosen by the shareholders. In the case the case of a government organisation, there is only one shareholder: the State of Victoria.

The main difference to a private corporation is that the Treasurer and relevant minister(s) have certain powers over the board. The Treasurer can direct the board to return capital, or declare a dividend. The Treasurer or relevant minister can give written directions to the board at any time. (The shadow of Speight is a long one.)

If you are curious, the details can be found in the State Owned Enterprises Act 1992 (the general rules governing all statutory corporations), and the Transport Integration Act 2010, sections 128-133, which specifically (re-)establishes V/Line.

V/Line is an agency of the state government, so I presume this "board" being spoken of is in fact the Cabinet?

Which two Ministers have resigned?

Where is that 'yer what now?' button when you need it. BEVANS!!!!!!!

Funny, I hadn't missed anyone .....................

Rats and sinking ship?

Funny, I hadn't missed anyone .....................

Rats and sinking ship?

I'm just an armchair nobody but from this distance, it's always seemed an odd organisation. Increasing patronage and modernisation always underway but then dysfunctional on planning and execution it seems from comments in this forum and the general media. Working in health, it seems much the same in the hospitals. It all could be so much better managed and organised as a service.

Funny, I hadn't missed anyone .....................

Rats and sinking ship?

I'm just an armchair nobody but from this distance, it's always seemed an odd organisation. Increasing patronage and modernisation always underway but then dysfunctional on planning and execution it seems from comments in this forum and the general media. Working in health, it seems much the same in the hospitals. It all could be so much better managed and organised as a service.

Generally with these Government Business entities the Board is appointed to comply with the Act, and as such past experience under both the Liberals and Labor State Governments is that Boards such as VLP are stacked with Directors paid typically $ 10k a meeting with little or no rail background/expertise,   but rather as prizes to loyal party suporters.(Jobs for the boys and girls) .

It should however be noted that Boards are NOT there to run the business, rather to oversight, ask questions of the CEO (who is usually also a member of such Boards).  Overall it is the CEO who makes the decisions and is supposed to run &  MANAGE the business on  a day to day basis .

Composition of VLP Boards or choice of VLP CEO's has not been what it could have been over the last decade, with a revolving door of four CEO's and now it appears a major jump ship from the VLP Board by two directors apparently.

Best thing now would be to bring VLP back under old style direct Government ownership (No Board) with responsibility by CEO direct to ONE Minister, with that CEO actually being an experierenced railway operational executive with a customer service focus and preferably a native Australian with local Victorian transport experience. Then and only then will the current VLP mess and product delivery actually improve.

Funny, I hadn't missed anyone .....................

Rats and sinking ship?

I'm just an armchair nobody but from this distance, it's always seemed an odd organisation. Increasing patronage and modernisation always underway but then dysfunctional on planning and execution it seems from comments in this forum and the general media. Working in health, it seems much the same in the hospitals. It all could be so much better managed and organised as a service.

Generally with these Government Business entities the Board is appointed to comply with the Act, and as such past experience under both the Liberals and Labor State Governments is that Boards such as VLP are stacked with Directors paid typically $ 10k a meeting with little or no rail background/expertise,   but rather as prizes to loyal party suporters.(Jobs for the boys and girls) .

It should however be noted that Boards are NOT there to run the business, rather to oversight, ask questions of the CEO (who is usually also a member of such Boards).  Overall it is the CEO who makes the decisions and is supposed to run &  MANAGE the business on  a day to day basis .

Composition of VLP Boards or choice of VLP CEO's has not been what it could have been over the last decade, with a revolving door of four CEO's and now it appears a major jump ship from the VLP Board by two directors apparently.

Best thing now would be to bring VLP back under old style direct Government ownership (No Board) with responsibility by CEO direct to ONE Minister, with that CEO actually being an experierenced railway operational executive with a customer service focus and preferably a native Australian with local Victorian transport experience. Then and only then will the current VLP mess and product delivery actually improve.

A Commissioner, responsible to a Minister like the old NSWGR, QGR, SAR, TGR, CR and WAGR (or the VR which had several Commissioners under a single Chairman of Commissioners).
What a novel idea.

Funny, I hadn't missed anyone .....................

Rats and sinking ship?

I'm just an armchair nobody but from this distance, it's always seemed an odd organisation. Increasing patronage and modernisation always underway but then dysfunctional on planning and execution it seems from comments in this forum and the general media. Working in health, it seems much the same in the hospitals. It all could be so much better managed and organised as a service.

Generally with these Government Business entities the Board is appointed to comply with the Act, and as such past experience under both the Liberals and Labor State Governments is that Boards such as VLP are stacked with Directors paid typically $ 10k a meeting with little or no rail background/expertise,   but rather as prizes to loyal party suporters.(Jobs for the boys and girls) .

It should however be noted that Boards are NOT there to run the business, rather to oversight, ask questions of the CEO (who is usually also a member of such Boards).  Overall it is the CEO who makes the decisions and is supposed to run &  MANAGE the business on  a day to day basis .

Composition of VLP Boards or choice of VLP CEO's has not been what it could have been over the last decade, with a revolving door of four CEO's and now it appears a major jump ship from the VLP Board by two directors apparently.

Best thing now would be to bring VLP back under old style direct Government ownership (No Board) with responsibility by CEO direct to ONE Minister, with that CEO actually being an experierenced railway operational executive with a customer service focus and preferably a native Australian with local Victorian transport experience. Then and only then will the current VLP mess and product delivery actually improve.

A Commissioner, responsible to a Minister like the old NSWGR, QGR, SAR, TGR, CR and WAGR (or the VR which had several Commissioners under a single Chairman of Commissioners).
What a novel idea.

Yeah full circle again. By comparison with hospital boards, they worked independently, then hospital networks were formed, then that failed and we went back to boards, now the move is to redo the grouping idea but they all still have boards and I don't know why. It's just jobs for the boys with nothing achieved other than new logos and stationery.

Funny, I hadn't missed anyone .....................

Rats and sinking ship?

I'm just an armchair nobody but from this distance, it's always seemed an odd organisation. Increasing patronage and modernisation always underway but then dysfunctional on planning and execution it seems from comments in this forum and the general media. Working in health, it seems much the same in the hospitals. It all could be so much better managed and organised as a service.

Generally with these Government Business entities the Board is appointed to comply with the Act, and as such past experience under both the Liberals and Labor State Governments is that Boards such as VLP are stacked with Directors paid typically $ 10k a meeting with little or no rail background/expertise,   but rather as prizes to loyal party suporters.(Jobs for the boys and girls) .

It should however be noted that Boards are NOT there to run the business, rather to oversight, ask questions of the CEO (who is usually also a member of such Boards).  Overall it is the CEO who makes the decisions and is supposed to run &  MANAGE the business on  a day to day basis .

Composition of VLP Boards or choice of VLP CEO's has not been what it could have been over the last decade, with a revolving door of four CEO's and now it appears a major jump ship from the VLP Board by two directors apparently.

Best thing now would be to bring VLP back under old style direct Government ownership (No Board) with responsibility by CEO direct to ONE Minister, with that CEO actually being an experierenced railway operational executive with a customer service focus and preferably a native Australian with local Victorian transport experience. Then and only then will the current VLP mess and product delivery actually improve.

A Commissioner, responsible to a Minister like the old NSWGR, QGR, SAR, TGR, CR and WAGR (or the VR which had several Commissioners under a single Chairman of Commissioners).
What a novel idea.

Yeah full circle again. By comparison with hospital boards, they worked independently, then hospital networks were formed, then that failed and we went back to boards, now the move is to redo the grouping idea but they all still have boards and I don't know why. It's just jobs for the boys with nothing achieved other than new logos and stationery.

I recall the announcement of the positions and there was overwhelming criticism (on these pages) of the lack of depth relating rail experience at the time.  

Maybe someone could find the link to the thread and see how accurate the crystal ball was back then.

From 2015

https://www.railpage.com.au/news/s/amended-rail-revival-alliance-response-to-v-line-board-appointments

But I believe the current appointments are from 2019?

Who has actually resigned?

Who has actually resigned?

I was wondering that. No other paper seems to be running the story.

The Board is now down to 4 members according to the V/line webpage....  There were 6 who resigned in August - Oct 2019.

The Board is now down to 4 members according to the V/line webpage....  There were 6 who resigned in August - Oct 2019.

Would that even be a Quorum?

Any losses must be a plus whether it be a lawyer, Water Authority member, bean counter or the engineer who doesn't know whether he is 'Charted' [sic] (as per the Vline website) or, perhaps 'chartered'.

There's only one answer. The name "V/Line" must be immediately dropped and replaced with something else, preferably with no apparent reference to railways.

The board will be down to 3 members at the end of May.  That's the minimum required for a quorum....