The East West Link, a question

 
  The Vinelander Minister for Railways

Location: Ballan, Victoria on the Ballarat RFR Line
Your an absolute looney!
How can you introduce legislation like that into Parliament? Put companies on notice? Are you F*cking for real?
The contract is bloody legit and is costed effectively and fairly, Victoria was getting a ripper deal. If you rip that contract up by introducing legislation, you have no idea how much that would affect business confidence in dealing with the Victorian Government.
How is this project corrupt? Give me facts.
There's great benefits in this project and also, you need to accept, we need ANOTHER river crossing now, not later, the West Gate Bridge is already over capacity, how long are you prepared for this to continue on?

By Donations?? Such slander, give everyone here proof of this otherwise that's downright slander! It's a PUBLIC-PRIVATE Partnership you moron! Citylink was the same, Labor opposed that aswell and imagine if we didn't have it?

The nerve..
mickamious

No more comments for me regarding this thread that's for sure lol.  @Mickamious

Couldn't help yourself hey..Question...Wink

Sponsored advertisement

  The Vinelander Minister for Railways

Location: Ballan, Victoria on the Ballarat RFR Line
Remember most commuters will not travel from East to West and you mention the Westgate, well the Eastern link is being built first so the argument about the Westgate is moot.

Michael
mejhammers1

Most commuters who live along the Eastern Freeway also live in conservative electorates and those SUV driving conservatives might have liked a traffic free, unimpeded route to the airport whenever they wanted to take a holiday...

That's what the former Napthine government was hoping to construct...the rest of Melbourne, suburbs, crowded trains and trams...be damned Exclamation

Mike.
  Crossover Train Controller

Location: St. Albans Victoria
Most commuters who live along the Eastern Freeway also live in conservative electorates and those SUV driving conservatives might have liked a traffic free, unimpeded route to the airport whenever they wanted to take a holiday...

That's what the former Napthine government was hoping to construct...the rest of Melbourne, suburbs, crowded trains and trams...be damned Exclamation

Mike.
The Vinelander
Not to mention , Vandalising Royal Park !! & destroying the liveability of the inner city !
  Crossover Train Controller

Location: St. Albans Victoria
Most commuters who live along the Eastern Freeway also live in conservative electorates and those SUV driving conservatives might have liked a traffic free, unimpeded route to the airport whenever they wanted to take a holiday...

That's what the former Napthine government was hoping to construct...the rest of Melbourne, suburbs, crowded trains and trams...be damned Exclamation

Mike.
Not to mention , Vandalising Royal Park !! & destroying the liveability of the inner city !
  Crossover Train Controller

Location: St. Albans Victoria
Most commuters who live along the Eastern Freeway also live in conservative electorates and those SUV driving conservatives might have liked a traffic free, unimpeded route to the airport whenever they wanted to take a holiday...

That's what the former Napthine government was hoping to construct...the rest of Melbourne, suburbs, crowded trains and trams...be damned Exclamation

Mike.
Not to mention , Vandalising Royal Park !! & destroying the liveability of the inner city !
  Bogong Chief Commissioner

Location: Essendon Aerodrome circa 1980
Actually Crossover, East - West Link will vastly improve "the liveability of living in the inner city".

I used to own a house on Princes St, North Carlton (the traffic sewer that the Eastern Freeway empties onto.). If you're not from the inner northern suburbs, it's a bit like Hoddle St - Punt Road or Springvale Road before Eastlink was built. It was impossible to cross my own street on foot and even at 4.00 am the huge trucks shook the earth so much that windows at the back of the house rattled. I liked the suburb, but not the street, so after seven years I sold up and moved a few hundred metres around the corner.

It will be a great blessing to people who live along the route when almost all the trucks and most of the cars are diverted into a tunnel and my old street becomes merely a main-ish road, rather than the nightmare it is now.
  speedemon08 Mary

Location: I think by now you should have figured it out
Actually Crossover, East - West Link will vastly improve "the liveability of living in the inner city".

I used to own a house on Princes St, North Carlton (the traffic sewer that the Eastern Freeway empties onto.). If you're not from the inner northern suburbs, it's a bit like Hoddle St - Punt Road or Springvale Road before Eastlink was built. It was impossible to cross my own street on foot and even at 4.00 am the huge trucks shook the earth so much that windows at the back of the house rattled. I liked the suburb, but not the street, so after seven years I sold up and moved a few hundred metres around the corner.

It will be a great blessing to people who live along the route when almost all the trucks and most of the cars are diverted into a tunnel and my old street becomes merely a main-ish road, rather than the nightmare it is now.
Bogong
I wonder....

90% of the traffic going down in to the Burbs via what will probably be the only east side offramp, Hoddle st. Situation not solved.
  TedHanson Junior Train Controller

East West link is a dog of a project, designed to save someone who lives in Balwyn five minutes on a trip to the airport. For those wanting to go to the city, about 90%, it does nothing. In fact, it makes it worse for those wanting to go down Hoddle as the number of exit lanes is reduced. The major road project we need is to connect the ring road from Greensborough to Ringwood. This is the real time saver for commercial vehicles. It will not be easy or cheap, but isn't going to get easier or cheaper. Every other city in the world have worked out that freeway type roads should circle the city and not make things worse by bringing people quicker into gridlock. Public transport should bring people into the city so that local arterial roads aren't clogged with one passenger vehicles which allows local commercial traffic some extra space.
  Bogong Chief Commissioner

Location: Essendon Aerodrome circa 1980
Actually Ted, it's mostly about things like employment, manufacturing and heavy transport.
  • There's a need for an efficient truck route to connect factories, warehouses and supply depots in eastern suburbs like Bayswater with those in the west. The quicker and cheaper transport between them is, the more efficient our businesses will be. That leads to all sorts of things like more jobs, less imports, higher profits (which equals higher company taxes paid and better dividends paid to our super funds), etc. The better the transport is between the eastern and western suburbs, the better it is for our economy.
  • Many people work in the western suburbs, but choose to live in the east. Traffic flows of cars outside my former house in Princes St, North Carlton were always heavier heading west in the morning and eastwards in the evening.

Anyway, just because Balwyn is an increasingly Chinese suburb, that doesn't mean that it's residents are always dashing off to the airport to head back to their homelands. I think that implication is a bit unfair and a not very accurate ethnic stereotype.

But let's be honest, whatever it is, it's also become a party political thingy. Some people are so opposed to the project because their political party is opposes to it, that even if the feds offered to pay for the lot (although that is very unlikely), and Victoria would get it for free, they would still be opposed on party political grounds and come up with all sorts of increasingly desperate reasons to continue slagging it off.

But East-West Link (or some substitute northern city bypass project) is increasingly necessary. When all this hysteria dies down and is forgotten in a decade, it will be built, probably by a Labour government.
  mejhammers1 Chief Commissioner

Actually Ted, it's mostly about things like employment, manufacturing and heavy transport.
  • There's a need for an efficient truck route to connect factories, warehouses and supply depots in eastern suburbs like Bayswater with those in the west. The quicker and cheaper transport between them is, the more efficient our businesses will be. That leads to all sorts of things like more jobs, less imports, higher profits (which equals higher company taxes paid and better dividends paid to our super funds), etc. The better the transport is between the eastern and western suburbs, the better it is for our economy.
  • Many people work in the western suburbs, but choose to live in the east. Traffic flows of cars outside my former house in Princes St, North Carlton were always heavier heading west in the morning and eastwards in the evening.

Anyway, just because Balwyn is an increasingly Chinese suburb, that doesn't mean that it's residents are always dashing off to the airport to head back to their homelands. I think that implication is a bit unfair and a not very accurate ethnic stereotype.

But let's be honest, whatever it is, it's also become a party political thingy. Some people are so opposed to the project because their political party is opposes to it, that even if the feds offered to pay for the lot (although that is very unlikely), and Victoria would get it for free, they would still be opposed on party political grounds and come up with all sorts of increasingly desperate reasons to continue slagging it off.

But East-West Link (or some substitute northern city bypass project) is increasingly necessary. When all this hysteria dies down and is forgotten in a decade, it will be built, probably by a Labour government.
Bogong
Gasp Bogong!! I think its unfair that you even mentioned about race. I dont think Ted Hanson even mentioned about the ethnic make up of the area, I am sure he mentioned Balwyn & the Airport because Balwyn is on the Eastern Freeway, he used Balwyn and the Airport as an example, he could have easily mentioned Doncaster.  Its not the first time you have made a wild assumption.

Just because you support it, it does not mean that  1 it is party political and 2 People are desperate. They who opposed it most likely have valid reasons to do so, 1 is that $18 Billion on a project that has not been properly designed and does not come even close a good cost benefit analysis (49p return for each dollar).

Michael
  Bogong Chief Commissioner

Location: Essendon Aerodrome circa 1980
Sorry, I though it was universally known that Balwyn was a suburb mainly inhabited by more affluent members of a particular ethnic group. So why choose that particular suburb if it wasn't intended to imply that they wished to get to the airport more than people in other suburbs?

I just said that it "was a bit unfair", I would never accuse anyone of being the "R word", because that's very nasty and puts people in an awkward situation where it's difficult for them to defend themselves.
  mejhammers1 Chief Commissioner

Sorry, I though it was universally known that Balwyn was a suburb mainly inhabited by more affluent members of a particular ethnic group. So why choose that particular suburb if it wasn't intended to imply that they wished to get to the airport more than people in other suburbs?

I just said that it "was a bit unfair", I would never accuse anyone of being the "R word", because that's very nasty and puts people in an awkward situation where it's difficult for them to defend themselves.
Bogong
Because he had probably mentioned it because Balwyn does come to mind when you are talking about the Eastern Freeway !!! and going to the Airport was just an example.

I never said that you thought he was a racist, I said it was unfair of you to mention race, when I do not think that was Ted's intention.

Michael
  tom9876543 Chief Train Controller

Your an absolute looney!
How can you introduce legislation like that into Parliament? Put companies on notice? Are you F*cking for real?
The contract is bloody legit and is costed effectively and fairly, Victoria was getting a ripper deal. If you rip that contract up by introducing legislation, you have no idea how much that would affect business confidence in dealing with the Victorian Government.
How is this project corrupt? Give me facts.
There's great benefits in this project and also, you need to accept, we need ANOTHER river crossing now, not later, the West Gate Bridge is already over capacity, how long are you prepared for this to continue on?

By Donations?? Such slander, give everyone here proof of this otherwise that's downright slander! It's a PUBLIC-PRIVATE Partnership you moron! Citylink was the same, Labor opposed that aswell and imagine if we didn't have it?

The nerve..
mickamious
Now we find out there was a "secret side letter": http://www.abc.net.au/news/2015-02-05/east-west-link-victorian-opposition-releases-secret-side-letter/6072904

This is fairly obvious evidence the Liberals are corrupt.
The amazing thing is the Liberals themselves released the letter!
This shows the Labor party should introduce legislation into parliament to reverse this disaster.
As I said previously, it should be called "The Liberal Party Contract Incompetence Reversal Act".

I also see the loony Mickamious hasn't made any further comments, after his lame attempt to try and defend the Liberal party.
  ARodH Chief Train Controller

Location: East Oakleigh, Vic
As I live in a extremely safe state Labor seat - thanks to the slowly declining Greek community - with some major projects forever proposed to occur in the area, East-West link would have F- all affect on me, but as my work takes me all over the place, if PT is the feasible option I'll use it but as it typically isn't I end up driving and during peak times I try my best to avoid the known traffic snarls, a few I swear Vicroads has deliberately engineered to cause them, by doing the 'rat run.
There has been times when to come home from the airport or other north-western locals, it was quicker to head for Eltham and go south than it was to go via the standard way.

The tl;dr version I want the road snarls fixed and better ways to go north, north-western and west from the southeastern suburbs of Melbourne, before I go nuts and start ordering a bunch of 'minefield ahead' and 'traffic rules enforced by snipers' signs.
  don_dunstan Dr Beeching

Location: Adelaide proud
The amazing thing is the Liberals themselves released the letter!
tom9876543
Hmmm... secret letter outside the contract promising all sorts of unearned goodies if the contract was cancelled by an incoming government. Matthew Guy seemed to think it would be well-received for some reason - that the public would think they were superior business-dealers because they promised to give a big corporation millions of dollars in exchange for nothing.

No wonder they're in opposition now.
  don_dunstan Dr Beeching

Location: Adelaide proud
Actually Crossover, East - West Link will vastly improve "the liveability of living in the inner city".
Bogong
Napthine should have signed the contracts and got the digging commenced in mid-2013; they left it until six weeks before caretaker time and then made it into an election issue: "Us or them". Foolish.

If the work had actually started then the case for keeping it going would have been fairly compelling but it didn't turn out that way - they just faffed around for way too long before deciding to try and do something... and the voters didn't like it.

Just out of interest, would the cheaper option of an elevated road up the Parade have been acceptable to you?
  tom9876543 Chief Train Controller

I am too lazy to try and do the maths....
Surely, isn't it cheaper to acquire property and build the freeway at surface level?
Another fact is it can be an 8 lane freeway; from memory the proposed East West tunnel is only 6 lanes.

Elliot Ave and Macurther Rd could be replaced by an 8 lane freeway at surface level, and then elevated bridge to connect to Citylink. That must be cheaper than the tunnel.

At Lygon St there are some large buildings. So I'm not sure if knocking them down would be cheaper than building a tunnel.
  Donald Chief Commissioner

Location: Donald. Duck country.
Napthine should have signed the contracts and got the digging commenced in mid-2013; they left it until six weeks before caretaker time and then made it into an election issue: "Us or them". Foolish.

If the work had actually started then the case for keeping it going would have been fairly compelling but it didn't turn out that way - they just faffed around for way too long before deciding to try and do something... and the voters didn't like it.

Just out of interest, would the cheaper option of an elevated road up the Parade have been acceptable to you?
don_dunstan
The problem is that Union Dan promised to ditch this idea and promised it would cost US nothing.   You would have had to have been 'Blind Freddy' to not anticipate something like this letter or an iron clad clause in the contract.   Some would have voted for Dan believing that he had all "the legal advice that this is not worth the paper it was signed on."   That was mistake number one.

So in the end we had no choice really.  
    1.  Build the road for $18 Billion that wasn't liked or wanted or costed properly or
    2.  Not build anything and still pay $1.1 Billion.

We lose both ways!!!
  don_dunstan Dr Beeching

Location: Adelaide proud
That must be cheaper than the tunnel.
tom9876543
A friend of mine (a civil engineer) assures me that an elevated roadway like Citylink is between the Bolte and Flemington Road would have been about half the price or less of the tunnel, but the residents of Parkville and Carlton would NOT have been happy having a piece of concrete spoil their view.

So they went for the most ludicrously expensive gold-plated option, a tunnel that cost somewhere between $1.5-$3 billion a kilometre - a record high price for Australia.

We lose both ways!!!
Donald
In my opinion the Liberals were their own worst enemy; they probably could have won the election with that toll-road provided they came up with a complimentary infrastructure program for public transport. I think Denis (being a country lad) just didn't understand the thinking of Bogong's derided inner-city latte-sippers that they wanted an improved public transport network as a matter of urgency... it kind of feeds into this thinking of Tony Abbott's that public transport is a naughty old socialist idea and that normal people should drive cars everywhere.

The best thing that Napthine could come up with in response was some lovely computer animations of the Tullamarine Airport train but no money or timetable for construction... it just wasn't good enough.
  tom9876543 Chief Train Controller

The problem is that Union Dan promised to ditch this idea and promised it would cost US nothing.   You would have had to have been 'Blind Freddy' to not anticipate something like this letter or an iron clad clause in the contract.   Some would have voted for Dan believing that he had all "the legal advice that this is not worth the paper it was signed on."   That was mistake number one.

So in the end we had no choice really.  
    1.  Build the road for $18 Billion that wasn't liked or wanted or costed properly or
    2.  Not build anything and still pay $1.1 Billion.

We lose both ways!!!
Donald
Donald, you may want to try reading earlier posts in the thread.
Option 3:
Victorian Government passes legislation to cancel the contract

Considering the highly unusual circumstances for this contract, where it looks like the Liberals were corrupt, option 3 is the best way to go.
  TedHanson Junior Train Controller

There appears to be confusion about the contract (which is still secret) and the "side letter" signed by ex Treasurer Michael O'Brien which was "secret" before the election, except that he showed it to the media arm of the Liberal Party, the HUN, and then released by him, while not in government, for the HUN to publish after the election.

The contract, no doubt, contains cancellation compensation provisions as do all such contracts. Generally, the cancellation provisions reflect the amount of work done up to that point as a way of calculating fair compensation. It is why, for instance, that the Baillieu government decided that it would be unwise to cancel either the myki contract (almost 100% complete) or the Desal contract (about 90% complete). Only a small amount of design work has been done on East West Link, in addition to the original bid (unsuccessful bidders were compensated tens of millions for their losing bids by the Napthine government which is worthy of investigation in itself).

The point Premier Andrews made before the election was in reference to the validity of the contract. A number of local Councils had challenged the contract because of what they said was the lack of adherence to current planning laws in the rush to get the contact signed before the election. Mr. Andrews said that he had legal advice to say that the Councils’ action would succeed in the courts, which gave rise to his description, "the contracts are not worth the paper they are written on." Whether this was true or not would depend on the outcome of the court case, but given that the Andrews government was going to enter a no-contest defence, it is doubtful whether the contracts would be declared valid. But that would still be a matter for the judge, who is not part of the parliamentary system. The judge can make up his (in this case) own mind. The judge could still determine that the compensation provisions remain active even though the rest of the contract is void. The judge could ask the parties to enter into a period of negotiation and come back with a solution. This happens all the time in contract law, and despite what the HUN says, does not present a sovereign risk.

The extraordinary part of the saga was the "side letter". This is the first time in Australia’s democratic history that a single member of a government has attempted to overrule the judiciary. The side letter does not talk about compensation as such, rather it purports to give comfort to the consortium that even if the contract is found to be 100% unlawful, by the courts, the compensation provision will apply. Now that is extraordinary. Not even Joh Bjelke Peterson tried that little trick. Remember, this letter was not a decision of parliament, and as far as we know, not been a decision of Cabinet. Rather, it was a unilateral decision of one minister in an executive capacity. The history of the courts in the last few hundred years or so has been to act as a brake on unilateral executive government, most notably when it acts corruptly or in defiance of the parliament and its laws.

Whether the state of Victoria ends up paying the consortium any more that the cost of work so far still remains uncertain. But I suggest that people who claim that we will have to pay billions should await the outcome before criticising the government on the payment issue. The Andrews government could legislate to void the contract, something the Kennett government also did. But this would not necessarily stop Supreme Court action for compensation, unless the legislation also barred access to the Supreme Court. In that respect, there is plenty of precedent from the Kennett era as well, but the makeup of the Legislative Council might make that difficult.
TedHanson
  don_dunstan Dr Beeching

Location: Adelaide proud
The extraordinary part of the saga was the "side letter". This is the first time in Australia’s democratic history that a single member of a government has attempted to overrule the judiciary. The side letter does not talk about compensation as such, rather it purports to give comfort to the consortium that even if the contract is found to be 100% unlawful, by the courts, the compensation provision will apply. Now that is extraordinary.
TedHanson
And then for some reason Matthew Guy decided that it would be a good idea after they lost the election to release the letter to the East-West Link cheer squad (the Herald Sun) to show everyone just how serious they were about it - or some other such flawed logic? If anything it makes them look totally irresponsible with taxpayer money. As you rightly point out, if it had been under way for 18 months and the drilling had actually commenced there was no way the contract was going to be cancelled. Napthine and his cabinet thought it was actually a good strategy to wait till six weeks out from care-taker mode to put the ink down and then make it an election issue because in their minds the public would actually vote for East-West. They were hoping there were enough Bogongs and Grossos' out there to get them across the line...

Denis' big gamble failed miserably and made them only the second one-term government in our state's history. Too bad, so sad.
  potatoinmymouth Chief Commissioner

Hey woodford, is there any more room in that bunker of yours?
  woodford Chief Commissioner

Hey woodford, is there any more room in that bunker of yours?
potatoinmymouth

Yeh, come in to the cool Wink

Note, this has been writen in an external text editor (vim to be exact) so it
will not respond to any formating.

In actual fact while there is a reasonable amount of what one may call party
politcal posts, which are simply not worth reading. There was some good valid
discussion. It has not changed my opinion that the liberal party signed the
contract in order to hang a lead weight on labor. The "side letter" I believe
being strong evidence for that. While it may be "normal legal practice" Its
certainly morally wrong. Politicians need to understand they will never get
any respect while they continue to behave like spoiled brats when the do not
get there own way and that is exactly what this is. The fact that the liberal's
still think it was reasonable behavior takes your breath away.

The only way we are going to get any where is for a bipartisan approach to
solve the problems. There is no magic bullet or single idea that will solve
the transport issue. USA has amply proved it appears that one simply cannot keep
shoveling money into roads, rail will always have its place, not least because it
uses a faction of the fuel to move items than road transport (Note 1). As time
moves on this will become of ever increasing importance.

We simply MUST be looking and providing for the future and this is not occuring
and given the current circumstances is not likely to occur.

Note 1: A grain train for example uses around 1/4 of the fuel per ton kilmetre
than road transport.

woodford
  don_dunstan Dr Beeching

Location: Adelaide proud
Woodford: Remains to be seen if Andrews will follow through on their public commitment to continue gauge-conversion of the intrastate freight network (what's left of it); I'll be impressed if they do in fact announce a program of continuous improvements/conversions/upgrades as the intrastate rail network is at a tipping point I feel - without big $$$ it will end up being completely un-viable. Time will tell.

Sponsored advertisement

Display from: