State Government tipped to offer Metro fresh contract to run rail network

 

News article: State Government tipped to offer Metro fresh contract to run rail network

METRO Trains looks set to be awarded another contract by the Andrews Government to run Melbourne’s rail network, just days after Thursday’s crippling peak hour shutdown.

  justapassenger Minister for Railways

...and this worked so well for V/line and QR which has never seen the lights of private....There is simply no proof that this will happen. If the govt wanted a better network, they would invest, but until the Metro line announcement they didn't.

Metro are running the system with the money they are given. The profit which is actually a management fee they make is a minor number compared to the total budget for the network.

The state govt is not bound by any contract that prevents them from investing in the network as evident by the Metro Project.
RTT_Rules
Today in the news section regarding the GovRail operator V/Line:
V/Line hired a general manager and paid him more than double his predecessor's salary, despite him refusing to provide a resume to the company's human resources department or submit to a probity check, Victoria's anti-corruption commission has been told.

Sponsored advertisement

  mejhammers1 Chief Commissioner

@railblogger I do not understand rhe point you are trying to make. The fact that a the network is failing through lack of investment and the contract has nothing to do with metro at all. A state run railway will see jack improvements unless the austem is adequately funded and that comes from the government. NSW rail system runs better because it has been properly funded not just because it is govt run.

Michael
  Madjikthise Deputy Commissioner

Metro are running the system with the money they are given. The profit which is actually a management fee they make is a minor number compared to the total budget for the network.
RTT_Rules
How do you know this? Does the government actually follow the money trail for whatever they hand over to Metro or do they just take Metro's word for it that it has actually been spent on the network? For all we know they may only be spending 50% of what they report on maintenance if there is nobody checking.
  DalyWaters Chief Commissioner

When Metro won the contract from Connex, we were promised immediate improvements.


In exchange for the immediate improvements, MTM were provided with $130 million PER YEAR more than Connex got!

Since then, management has gone from 80 administrative staff under Connex to over 300 managers with MTM.

Can anyone name one improvement MTM have provided for the Melbourne network?
  RTT_Rules Oliver Bullied, CME

Location: Dubai UAE
Metro are running the system with the money they are given. The profit which is actually a management fee they make is a minor number compared to the total budget for the network.
How do you know this? Does the government actually follow the money trail for whatever they hand over to Metro or do they just take Metro's word for it that it has actually been spent on the network? For all we know they may only be spending 50% of what they report on maintenance if there is nobody checking.
Madjikthise
I and I suspect most if not all here know exactly how the contract was written and the auditing process.

For example,
- is there a requirement to spend X out the pull of money provided on maintenance?
- I work for a Quasi govt company in UAE, we have govt that are constantly going through how the money was spent and are we delivering max value for the govt etc.

The flip side is that being 100% govt controlled and operated doesn't guarantee the rightful outcome either although I'd dare say the govt is in far better control today than in years gone by when organisations like the NSW SRA were caught out with employees basically looting the organisation in one form or another and I also have friends who used to work for QR.

However for today, again we don't have to look past V/line or QR for why the govt model is not the utopia some seem to paint it to be.
  DalyWaters Chief Commissioner

However for today, again we don't have to look past V/line or QR for why the govt model is not the utopia some seem to paint it to be.
RTT_Rules
The woes of V/Line.

Brought to you in no small part by ex Metro managers.
  RTT_Rules Oliver Bullied, CME

Location: Dubai UAE
However for today, again we don't have to look past V/line or QR for why the govt model is not the utopia some seem to paint it to be.
The woes of V/Line.

Brought to you in no small part by ex Metro managers.
DalyWaters
...and future Mel/line run by present ex Metro Manager.

Usual privatisation/outsourcing process will apply. Same people, different shirt and EXCO/CEO.
  railblogger Chief Commissioner

Location: At the back of the train, quitely doing exactly what you'd expect.
@railblogger I do not understand rhe point you are trying to make. The fact that a the network is failing through lack of investment and the contract has nothing to do with metro at all. A state run railway will see jack improvements unless the austem is adequately funded and that comes from the government. NSW rail system runs better because it has been properly funded not just because it is govt run.

Michael
mejhammers1
The point I'm trying to make is that the government does not have full control over the system - they may control over the infrastructure, number of services or punctuality targets but they do not have control over the operation of the system, thus Metro can do whatever it wants so long as it abides by its contract with the Government - no matter how they go about doing it.

In addition to this, during the negotiations relating to the contract, Metro can (at least attempt to) squeeze whatever it wants out of the government - even if it isn't in the interests of the taxpayer (which is most likely).
  RTT_Rules Oliver Bullied, CME

Location: Dubai UAE
@railblogger I do not understand rhe point you are trying to make. The fact that a the network is failing through lack of investment and the contract has nothing to do with metro at all. A state run railway will see jack improvements unless the austem is adequately funded and that comes from the government. NSW rail system runs better because it has been properly funded not just because it is govt run.

Michael
The point I'm trying to make is that the government does not have full control over the system - they may control over the infrastructure, number of services or punctuality targets but they do not have control over the operation of the system, thus Metro can do whatever it wants so long as it abides by its contract with the Government - no matter how they go about doing it.

In addition to this, during the negotiations relating to the contract, Metro can (at least attempt to) squeeze whatever it wants out of the government - even if it isn't in the interests of the taxpayer (which is most likely).
railblogger
I still don't understand.

The govt controls the major infrastructure upgrades and funds them, ie new Metro tunnel project
The govt controls thew timetable, fare structure and performance targets
The govt controls the contents of the contract, don't like it, next!!!

What the govt doesn't control directly is the day to day operation. Rostering, wages, training, hiring, firing, sickness, career development, maintenance (not most newer commuter trains in Australia are not maintained by the operator), painting, crowd control, cleaning the toilets, a late running service from Eltham, public relations, fare protection etc etc.  

Do we really want our govt to be involved in this crap or focus on the bigger picture? The problems with Melbourne's trains is not the operator, was it much different under previous operator, or even when the govt ran it? The current and previous operators have operations elsewhere, you would think they have at least half a clue. A few years prior to the franchise the operation was a basket case.  Focus on the big picture, fix in the inbuilt structural issues in the network that cause the delays, cancellations etc etc. If the govt is starving them of funding, then change in control isn't going to make the slightest bit of difference. Ultimately as far as the tax payer is concerned, the buck still stops with the Transport Minister.
  railblogger Chief Commissioner

Location: At the back of the train, quitely doing exactly what you'd expect.
Do we really want our govt to be involved in this crap or focus on the bigger picture? The problems with Melbourne's trains is not the operator, was it much different under previous operator, or even when the govt ran it? The current and previous operators have operations elsewhere, you would think they have at least half a clue. A few years prior to the franchise the operation was a basket case.  Focus on the big picture, fix in the inbuilt structural issues in the network that cause the delays, cancellations etc etc. If the govt is starving them of funding, then change in control isn't going to make the slightest bit of difference. Ultimately as far as the tax payer is concerned, the buck still stops with the Transport Minister.
RTT_Rules
Yes. Government should take responsibility for everything, not shunt it off to somebody else.
  mejhammers1 Chief Commissioner

@railblogger. The key sentence is abide by the contract. A contract drawn up by the Government. The Government does not want to have a bar of running the system. Because they know that the network is so fragile it is not a question of it will fail then when. They are usong Metro as a scapegoat. The system is crap through years and of under investment. So if you think that returning it to Government hands will deliver immediate benefits then good luck with that. I very much doubt it.

Michael
  x31 Chief Commissioner

Location: gallifrey
What it may well do is ensure all the money being sent off shore will be re-invested and the subsidy paid by us will reduce.

That is initial. It boils down to a group of overpaid idiots in the infrastructure department who could not run a system outsourced or not if their life depended on it.  The entire operation is simply a joke but the issue is becoming clearer.  it would be political suicide to extend metro at the moment.
  railblogger Chief Commissioner

Location: At the back of the train, quitely doing exactly what you'd expect.
They are using Metro as a scapegoat.
mejhammers1
My point exactly. They should be taking the blame.

Sponsored advertisement

Subscribers: Boss, doyle, RTT_Rules

Display from:   

Quick Reply

We've disabled Quick Reply for this thread as it was last updated more than six months ago.