Here comes a very fast train! (Please, save us!)

 

Proponents of Prime Minister Albanese’s proposed $90 billion “very fast train” between Sydney and Newcastle must either be extraordinarily optimistic or extraordinarily well paid to promote it. It is hard to believe that anyone could honestly support such a proposal without financial incentive.

Too harsh? Everyone is entitled to an opinion, of course. But some opinions—for example, the belief that the earth is flat—are also open to ridicule. Entitlement does not guarantee credibility.

That this utterly risible proposal has been allocated $60 million for a business case plus a further $600 million for detailed planning before a cent is spent on actually trying to build it, is an insult to the democratic process. No one voted for what is shaping up as Australia’s most expensive infrastructure project - ever. If you thought the blowout of Snowy Hydro 2.0 from the $2 billion first announced in 2017 to the now $40 billion and 7 years late outlook was bad, this will be worse. It’s a vanity project of the Prime Minister of the highest order. “I will not be the Prime Minister when high-speed rail is finished but I am determined to be the Prime Minister who starts it,” he said earlier this year. Is that a promise or a threat?

Here are some details of what’s proposed: a 190 kilometre new fast rail connection from Newcastle to Sydney which will include 115 kilometres of tunnels and 38 kilometres of bridges and viaducts. Let that sink in. The primary rationale seems to be to alleviate the housing pressures of Sydney by opening up 160,000 new homes in the Newcastle area, so that people can live more cheaply there and commute to work in Sydney. Somehow, this is supposed to create a massive economic uplift – which it will, chiefly for the consultants who will enjoy riding this gravy train to its inevitable cost and time over runs.

The train promises to cut the train trip time from Newcastle to Sydney from around 2.5 hours to one hour. Driving the same currently takes 2.5 hours. The current regular air service by the regional airline operator takes 40 minutes – and this is evidently a commercial route (that is, not subsidised).

Why turn Newcastle into a dormitory for Sydney city centre office workers at a cost of $90billion (before catastrophic cost blow outs) when you could instead create more jobs in Newcastle, for much less? Imagine a Newcastle economy offering zero payroll taxes (estimated by Ai at $500m pa) and no land taxes ($350m pa). Do you think that might attract a few more jobs to the region? In fact, for $90billion, imagine the value of economic opportunity you could unlock in countless regional cities and towns across the country?

Proponents will point to the Eurostar connection between London and Paris as proof that fast rail can work. Yes, but each of those cities are metro regions of around 14 million people – which is a total market served of near 30 million - more than the entire population of Australia today. Or proponents might point to Japan’s Shinkansen – which services a combined population of 90 million people across several key cities. Or they might tout the Beijing-Shanghai high speed rail corridor – which serves a combined 150 to 200 million people. None are relevant to Australia’s population – now or projected – or our geography, and certainly not our economy.

You would be forgiven that the Prime Minister at some stage picked up the script for the episode of ABC TV’s “Utopia” which satirised the very fast train, but he mistakenly thought it a solid sounding idea. You just can’t make this stuff up. Here’s a Youtube link to refresh your memory: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8av3knflbQo

Instead of vainly grasping at examples that lack relevancy to shore up support, how about we think about some more local experiences? Melbourne’s proposed suburban rail loop was first announced in 2018 as a $50 billion project. It is now estimated by the Victorian Government’s Parliamentary Budget Office to cost a likely $216 billion in construction costs plus 50 years of operating deficits (losses) – for the first two stages.

Closer to home, Brisbane’s Cross River Fail was promised over and over again to be a $5.4 billion project that would revolutionise the network across SEQ. Passenger services were supposed to start this year. Latest cost estimates are a total program cost of $19 billion and a completion date of 2029.

Breaking the mould was Brisbane’s Moreton Bay Rail line – promised by eager-to-be-elected politicians for 130 years – and which was finally opened only a few months behind schedule (or 130 years late depending on how you look at it) in 2016 and only 15% over budget. But when first proposed, it was promised to carry around 10,000 passengers per day rising to 18,000 by 2031. Early usage after opening in 2016 was far lower, at roughly 5,000 daily passengers – and the number hasn’t changed over time much despite the advent of 50c fares and substantial population growth.

Interestingly, the business case was based on the assumption that more people would use the service to commute to the city centre for work (sound familiar Prime Minister Albanese?) Premier Jackie Tradd said at the time “A project like this, that will see 600 new trains go from the Redcliffe Peninsula to the city CBD every week, is a fantastic initiative for workers in this area.” In actual fact, rather than some 70% of users being commuters to the city centre as expected, estimates are that only around 30% are for this type of commute: the balance are local or inter suburban journeys. As always, the idea that people live in outer areas because they have no choice and do so for affordability only, and endure long commutes to city centre jobs, was a furphy.

(As an aside, when opening the Moreton Bay line, then PM Malcolm Turnbull said: “Realistically, someone could jump on a train here in Kippa Ring and use our public transport network to visit the beaches of Gold Coast or Sunshine Coast.”  Sure Malcolm, carting all your eskies and cabanas on the train, changing at central, and being dumped at Robina sounds like a fab way to enjoy the beach. Oh, did I mention this is the same PM who gave us Snowy Hydro 2.0?)

As for Cross River Rail, the original promise of an extra 52,000 passengers in the morning peak is looking shaky, as is the projected 95,000 by 2036. The current morning peak accounts for around 35,000 to 45,000 passengers – well below the original business case assumptions and this notwithstanding the advent of 50 cent fares. The extra stations will be great for the convenience of those working near them, or for occasional major events, but it is hard to see any of the original passenger projections getting remotely close to being realised.

Maybe our Prime Minister should spend some time talking to California Governor (and US Democratic Presidential aspirant) Gavin Newsom about his proposed Los Angeles to San Francisco high speed rail? First proposed in 2008 at a cost of $33 billion, and serving a combined population of 30 million people, latest estimates put the total cost at above $100 billion and maybe as much as $200 billion. It was originally said to be completed by around 2020, but it’s now looking more like 2040. So a final cost that is four times the original estimate and two decades late. To trim costs, recent reports suggest the twin track rail connection will now become a single track – dramatically cutting speeds and network efficiency. The fast train has been slowed down, even before it started.

With a couple of exceptions, there’s something in common with all these: they are championed by politicians, not demanded by the people. They involve obscene amounts of taxpayer dollars and are run by government agencies, with consistently dismal delivery records and almost none come close to meeting their original assumptions.

With an economy looking distinctly sick at present, and with the Federal budget blowing out due to unrestrained spending (and increasing taxes to pay for it) is this really the time to indulge a Prime Minister’s whim which even the most generous supporter must surely question? Unless they’re getting paid to support it that is.

Postscript: no sooner had I finished the research and write up for this, that we got news the Queensland section of the proposed Inland Rail freight project has been canned. According to The Courier Mail: “More than 30 years after the multi-state freight route was first proposed and with more than $2bn already spent, Labor says the cost for the full 1600km project had blown out to more than $45bn and would take at least another decade… As of 2023 more than $2bn had already been spent but an independent review warned the project’s costs had grown from $16.4bn to $31.4bn in just two years… A new analysis concluded it would cost in excess of $45bn and take until 2037 to deliver in full.”

The one thing rail is good at is freight. The rail freight project that’s actually started is dumped but the Prime Minister’s $90 billion thought bubble is to proceed.

I promise, I’m not making this up.