THE member for Indi, Cathy McGowan, has again pushed the role she says high-speed rail can play in decentralisation.

But she said it would not happen unless the federal government showed the political will to reserve a rail corridor.

Ms McGowan raised the issue in a wide-ranging budget speech to Parliament on Monday night.

Completely agree with her comments.  Of course having high speed rail will assist in decentralisation. A similar trend has happened with RFR.  I know I have said it but the quicker it gets built the better off Australia will be and other opportunities will flow from the investment.

$63b for the project is very reasonable.

Completely agree with her comments.  Of course having high speed rail will assist in decentralisation. A similar trend has happened with RFR.  I know I have said it but the quicker it gets built the better off Australia will be and other opportunities will flow from the investment.

$63b for the project is very reasonable.

Everyone wants High Speed Rail but no one will fund it. If there is a time to build it then its now. With the mining boom over, construction jobs will be in surplus and cheaper to hire and the price tag will therefore be lower. If we get legislation through protecting a corridor, then investment will come. There just needs to be a govt willing to take the first step and approve of the project. No more feasibility studies are needed. Every study says the same thing about routes and only the costs change. Engineering studies are needed. Tell us whats the best solution along the preferred corridor to get 350kph top speed.

Get on with it

$63b for the project is very reasonable.

We must have very different definitions of reasonable.

That would just about solve every transport problem in each capital city whilst not destroying private enterprise (aviation).

The Member for Indi should focus on more immediate concerns for her constituents such as getting the V/Line Albury service up to scratch instead of focussing on pork-filled pipe dreams.

The Member for Indi should focus on more immediate concerns for her constituents such as getting the V/Line Albury service up to scratch instead of focussing on pork-filled pipe dreams.

You clearly have miss understood Cathy, She is constantly pushing everyone she can for upgrades to the Albury line. Of all the local state and federal politicians that have been installed in this neck of the woods (NE Victoria and the Goulburn valley)  she is the only one I have ever met while she was out talking to the people.
I gave her what info I could on the regauging and the problems with the current train service, she was VERY interested.

A pleasure to meet a politicain that actually really cares what people think, Note she listened to me inspite of me NOT being in her electorate.

woodford

A high speed service from here to mwlnournenor Canberra is the future for this region. Cathy has been very diligent in sourcing the views of locals and can see the benefits of high speed rail has can most people.

'mwlnournenor'

I bet the spellchecker had fun with that one.

A high speed service from here to Melbourne or Canberra is the future for this region. Cathy has been very diligent in sourcing the views of locals and can see the benefits of high speed rail has can most people.

HSR benefits 'most people'? Please.

Lets start from the top - overall societal benefit. HSR productivity gains will be much lower than predicted - it's a marginal replacement for domestic air travel. Job creation? Aside from construction (which are all temporary jobs), it will have a small effect on regional cities - unless your city has a maintenance depot for it, of course. Won't be any need for drivers on a HSR network either - I'm amazed that automation hasn't hit that sector sooner.
Environmental effects? Well, the enormous volumes of CO2 produced during construction won't do it much good. Unless you have a very low CO2 electricity grid, the savings from using electricity vs aviation fuel will be minimal or possibly negative.

Ok then - here's who HSR benefits the most... businesspeople. They can afford to commute using HSR, because they can afford to commute using existing regional air services. They'll grab a nice little place in one of the regional cities along the route (inflating property demand) and commute to work... in Melbourne or Canberra (or Sydney). Why? Because that's still where all the jobs will be. As a corollary to that, real estate agents and property speculators will make a lot of money from tree-changing yuppies.

HSR will turn regional cities into dormitory suburbs for the big cities. That's not decentralisation - that's infrastructure-enabled centralisation.

So, what about people on lower incomes? Well, if HSR is going to break-even on an operational basis (perish the thought that it will amortise its construction costs) then the fare prices will be comparable to regional airfares. That's not going to be affordable for that part of the community. Of course, you could subsidise fares... but that's just sending good money after bad.

I like Cathy McGowan - I just hope that she stops parroting about all of the non-existent benefits that HSR will bring to her electorate. It's not like she has no other areas to focus her lobbying efforts on.

As an aside, she's probably got a good chance of keeping her seat in 2016, given that it looks like Sophie Mirabella will 'win' pre-selection as the Liberals candidate.

HSR benefits 'most people'? Please.

Lets start from the top - overall societal benefit. HSR productivity gains will be much lower than predicted - it's a marginal replacement for domestic air travel. Job creation? Aside from construction (which are all temporary jobs), it will have a small effect on regional cities - unless your city has a maintenance depot for it, of course. Won't be any need for drivers on a HSR network either - I'm amazed that automation hasn't hit that sector sooner.
Environmental effects? Well, the enormous volumes of CO2 produced during construction won't do it much good. Unless you have a very low CO2 electricity grid, the savings from using electricity vs aviation fuel will be minimal or possibly negative.

Ok then - here's who HSR benefits the most... businesspeople. They can afford to commute using HSR, because they can afford to commute using existing regional air services. They'll grab a nice little place in one of the regional cities along the route (inflating property demand) and commute to work... in Melbourne or Canberra (or Sydney). Why? Because that's still where all the jobs will be. As a corollary to that, real estate agents and property speculators will make a lot of money from tree-changing yuppies.

HSR will turn regional cities into dormitory suburbs for the big cities. That's not decentralisation - that's infrastructure-enabled centralisation.

So, what about people on lower incomes? Well, if HSR is going to break-even on an operational basis (perish the thought that it will amortise its construction costs) then the fare prices will be comparable to regional airfares. That's not going to be affordable for that part of the community. Of course, you could subsidise fares... but that's just sending good money after bad.

I like Cathy McGowan - I just hope that she stops parroting about all of the non-existent benefits that HSR will bring to her electorate. It's not like she has no other areas to focus her lobbying efforts on.

As an aside, she's probably got a good chance of keeping her seat in 2016, given that it looks like Sophie Mirabella will 'win' pre-selection as the Liberals candidate.

No one will be commuting from regional cities more than now as the cost will be prohibitive.

I believe the TGV is Auto capable but not implemented. As HSR started in unionised countries maybe the focus was not auto, yet!

What a brilliant post Lance, it sums up most of the sensible reasons why it just isn't smart to waste squillions building it, when it would only displace air travel which is already cheap, fast and efficient.

Instead we could use the same amount of money to build almost every speculative urban rail project in both Sydney and Melbourne as well as funding Canberra's proposed new trams.

Just one area of disagreement. I hear that the local Libs and Nats know that Sophie gets a lot of negative reaction from swinging voters, so they might preselect some bloke who I think is called Kevin to run for Indi instead.

Just one area of disagreement. I hear that the local Libs and Nats know that Sophie gets a lot of negative reaction from swinging voters, so they might preselect some bloke who I think is called Kevin to run for Indi instead.

The Federal Libs want Sophie back in Parliament, so they'll try to pull out all stops to get her preselected. The local party organisation in Indi wants her back a lot less, I'm sure. The Nats are still a-feudin' with the Libs because they still reckon Indi should be in their territory.

If she won't get preselected for Indi, I'm sure she'll be getting a place on the Senate ticket in Victoria. How high up on the ticket she would get put depends a lot on how important Abbott will think she'll be. If I were Tones, I'd be putting her 3rd on the ticket - just enough to make her think she has a chance, but realistically she won't get in.

The Member for Indi should focus on more immediate concerns for her constituents such as getting the V/Line Albury service up to scratch instead of focussing on pork-filled pipe dreams.

At the end of the day the Member for Indi is a federal MP and V/Line is a state issue. All she can do in reality is write to the Premier or the Minister for Public Transport about the Albury line service.

Mike.

Instead we could use the same amount of money to build almost every speculative urban rail project in both Sydney and Melbourne as well as funding Canberra's proposed new trams.

100% correct with the exception also including Brisbane, Perth, Adelaide and even Hobart's LR project.

Instead we could use the same amount of money to build almost every speculative urban rail project in both Sydney and Melbourne as well as funding Canberra's proposed new trams.

Provided there's no "knitting" involved, of course.