Media reporting suggests that Victorian Public Transport Minister Lynne Kosky’s departure was indeed for “family reasons”. Whatever the details (and they of course aren’t our business), good luck to her and her family as she confronts what sounds like a very serious challenge.
Kosky’s time in the public transport portfolio has not been a happy one, and her departure will undoubtedly be handy for the government. Victoria’s public transport system, particularly the train system, has failed to cope with a big increase in passenger numbers. Nor could it cope with extreme weather; on the increasingly common 40 degree days down here in Melbourne, massive disruptions in the train system have become routine due to limitations with train air conditioning systems, buckling rails, and sagging wires. To top it off, the myki smartcard ticketing system is three years late, way over budget, and its tentative and partial introduction still isn’t working properly.
But how much is Kosky herself to blame for all of this?
The Age‘s Clay Lucas examines Kosky’s performance as Transport Minister and quotes a number of anonymous sources as being unimpressed with her understanding of the transport portfolio, indicating that she was unable to discern poor information from bureaucrats and take effective decisions, contrasting her unfavourably with her predecessor in the position, Peter Batchelor.
However, when it comes down to it, the major reasons why Melbourne’s public transport system is under pressure – underinvestment in rolling stock and lines, the unwieldy profusion of separate companies holding contracts for various parts of the operation (which are now unified in the new contract with Metro Trains), and the loopy decision to sign a contract for a very large, very complex ticketing system with a company that had never built a ticketing system before – were all made under Batchelor’s watch, and presumably with the influence of then-Treasurer Brumby. The large dollops of infrastructure to fix the underinvestment, by contrast, got under way in Kosky’s tenure, even if it will be years before they are completed.
Paul Mees critiques Kosky’s performance from another angle – the continuation of the franchise model, rather than an integrated, accountable public transport authority. But any such major reforms would have to be taken by Cabinet anyway.
So does Kosky deserve her public image? And how do you fairly assess the substantive performance of individual ministers, given that despite all the issues supposedly troubling the Brumby government they’re still way ahead in the polls?
Myki is a compounding clusterf##k.
I have some advice for the Victorian Government. Allow the different companies to subcontract fares collectors, so long as the subcontractors agree to employ conductors on buses, trains and trams. Reintroduce the scratchies which were a foolproof, low-tech, dependable means of selling time on the system.
yes, Im puzzled to why they didnt buy it off the shelf from teh comopany that didthe swipe card in brisbane – which appear to wokr fine.
the wider problem is neitehr Minsiter – IMHO (though Kosky wasnt great) – its the prviatised rail. melbiurne is expanding, and neeed to be pouring income from rail back into infrasstrucuture for another great expansion, a la 1880s. Instad , its lining private pockets. It should be in state hands – Kosky famously admitted privatisation hadnt saved the VIC govt a single cent. There goes that argument then . So we’re still paying just as much, but we dont it. And getting nothing for it in terms of infrastructure investment. Public policy FAIL.
There’s your solution – put it back in government hands and invest the dividednds in expansion. Now we just need a govt with the sense and courage to enact it. Melbourne literally loses millions in lost work productivity from the shitty private rail network, and its ubiquitous malfunctions.
Yes, Im puzzled to why they didnt buy it off the shelf from the company that did the swipe card in Brisbane – which appear to work fine.
The wider problem is neither Minsiter – IMHO (though Kosky wasnt great) – its the privatised rail. Melbourne is expanding, and needs to be pouring income from rail back into infrastrucuture for another great expansion a la the 1880s. Instead , its lining private pockets, and patching potholes – badly at that.
It should be in state hands – Kosky famously admitted that privatisation hadnt saved the VIC govt a single cent. There goes that whole argument then. So we’re still paying just as much, but we dont own it. And getting nothing for it in terms of infrastructure investment. Public policy FAIL.
There’s your solution – put it back in government hands and invest the dividends in expansion. Now we just need a govt with the sense and courage to enact it. Melbourne literally loses millions in lost work productivity every year from the shitty private rail network, and its ubiquitous malfunctions.
Mees’ consistent criticism that the failure is one of management and planning, not infrastructure, must give one pause for thought. Personally, I’ve never seen the wisdome of pritavising public transport, and I’m not aware of an example of where it has been done well.
The idea that its crappy managers not infrastructure is just not supported by any evidence.
There are many people who would like different bureaucratic arrangements in place but to suggest that the transition to an independent transport agency, or to end privatisation will magically fix everything just makes no sense.
Melbourne has had chronic underinvestment in rail for nigh on fifty years. It catches up after a while.
No LeftyE – The solution is for us all to pay more taxes to enable Governments to do all the work we are constantly banging on about. Perhaps if we all fully appreciated the concept of partisanship the moaning and groaning might abate (I’m not holding my breath on this one).
Robert Merkel may accept and repeat Clay Lucas’ attribution to “anonymous sources” who (surprise, surprise) are “unimpressed” but I’m dont. Why should we be subjected to this cheap and trashy kind of journalism. If they haven’t got direct quotes they should not be printing it. It’s probably Clay Lucas’ own opinion but he doesn’t have the guts to come out openly with his criticisms but rather, like many journalists(?) seeks to cloak it with anonimity. What cowards they are – and what cowards are we that we rarely seek to confront it.
The thing is, nobody out there in voterland really does blame the Minister for any systemic faults. They blame (or praise) the whole party.
The Vic ALP, having accepted Brumby’s bullshit re PPPs, debt and the cost of rail infrastructure, can’t hide form this one, not after ten years in power. Doesn’t matter whether it was Kosky, Batchelor or whoever.
If I was shit in my job I’m sure it’d create ‘family issues’ as well. That said I doubt Kosky is all that sorry to have the portfolio behind her.
We haven’t really had any long, long heatwaves this Summer yet – I’m sure those will come next month – but when we do I’m not expecting things to pan out much differently than they did last year. Cancelled trains, stressed out commuters, nasty headlines. Thank fuck I’m finally learning to drive.
Public transport in Melbourne is rooted but I’m not expecting anything to get better in the mid to even distant future. ‘Tis the Australian way – sunny, laid back, but shithouse at things zany foreigners take for granted.
“No LeftyE – The solution is for us all to pay more taxes to enable Governments to do all the work we are constantly banging on about.”
Or by taking more of the existing income from the rail network – by running it. Rather than giving a private company an 8-year licence to print money, while running a substandard service.
Its a no brainer, people. Privatisation has failed. Lets take back the income, and reinvest it in infrastructure.
Bogan, if you (and others) think Melbourne’s public transport is rooted, I suggest you visit Adelaide. You’ll go home thankful for what you have.
Point taken DI – and its still comparatively true. But it could be LOADS better than this.
eg Brisbane is still public transport poor by comparison, but its on the way up, whereas Melbourne is most defintely trending down (especially rail).
LeftyE, the trouble is that governments don’t reinvest the income in infrastructure as evidenced by the shit public transport in this country. Having said that, private enterprise has never made a good fist of public transport, which is why Tom Playford invented the MTT.
el oso: I thought it fairly obvious from the context in which I referred to it that I’m somewhat skeptical of Lucas’s “anonymous sources”.
I’m in no position to know about how effective Kosky has been internal to the government or her portfolio. However her public handling of transport issues has been appalling. Her comments about commuters being “preoccupied with punctuality” and “Do I want to run a train system? I don’t think so” show a remarkable lack of empathy for public transport users, even if you can almost see what she means (if you squint and look sideways).
I’ll throw this in here because it’s relevant and has been getting me annoyed for too long.
This IPA Backgrounder on PT Privatization unsurprisingly argues that it has been A Good Thing. For me the most outrageous argument is as follows:
And yet the investment in new rolling stock is entirely at the whim of the government! So with privatization we have a system where there will be new rolling stock if and only if the government makes the decision to invest in such, as opposed to the old non-privatized system where there would be new rolling stock if and only if the government made the decision to invest in such.
At best the privatization brought ‘experienced’ operators to manage the purchase of new rolling stock (but not the money for these purchases as this was provided for in their contracts). And gee, didn’t that work out well?
To call this a coherent argument in favour of privatization is difficult to do.
The problems of Melbourne’s public transport, especially the trains, are the result of decades of underinvestment, as Kosky herself said in a moment of candour. Since the Labor Party has been in power for all but seven years since 1982, the chief culprit is not hard to find.
It is a fantasy to believe that returning the system to public operation would not necessarily help. If that were so, Sydney’s public transport would be better than Melbourne’s. If anything it is worse, but the essential problem is the same – underinvestment on a grand scale.
The physical problems of the system and the Myki debacle were not directly Kosky’s fault, though she would have happily claimed the credit had the system worked well. But the political mismanagement is clearly her fault. Kosky was guilt of over promising and under delivering, especially with Myki.
Erratum: delete ‘not’ before ‘necessarily help’.
I’m sure you’re correct, LeftyE – after all, underspending on basic infrastructure is an inevitable consequence of privatisation. However, my attitude to Melbourne’s public transport system is determined by two events (neither of which would be even thinkable in Adelaide).
In 1983, I took the train from Bendigo to the Maton factory to have the neck of my guitar straightened (nearly 50 years old, and it still plays like a dream … ) which required one change, and a short walk at either end of the journey. A few years ago, I was in Melbourne for a few days and visited my cousin in Northcote. I could have chosen either the train, the tram, or a bus, with very reasonable waiting times ofr all of them, and only a short walk at the end.
I know DI – I grew up in brisbane. The public transport motto there, for decades, was “what’s wrong with your car?”.
Im happy to report great improvement – included integrated ticketing that works, in my old home town. But good public transport is Melbourne’s whole thang. Why are idiots messing with a winning formula?
And Martin’s right: kosky and co have uttered some shockers. The Douchebag who ran Connex once said “hey, trains running on time is incompatible with Melbourne’s laid-back vibe!”.
Im sure I wasnt the only one wondering how laid back he’d be with a full rail timetable up his ass.
I think its fair to say that the management of Victoria’s public transport is ineffective. How could MYKI have taken so long, cost so much and still not work. One imagines that the transport authority didn’t specify what they wanted clearly, the transport authority kept changing their mind, some fool wanted to gild the lily rather than deliver a basic system that worked. The software was written in India and doesn’t work well enough to be tested.
The problems with the transport authority are long standing. The transport authority sets public transport timetables and considers that buses compete against trains so
- in the 1970s the Beaumaris bus left 5 minutes before the express train pulled into Cheltenham station guaranteeing passengers a 90 minute wait or 5 mile walk
- in the 1990s the Torquay bus pulled out 5 minutes before the scheduled arrival of the [hourly] train at Geelong station
- currently the Port Phillip council is campaigning to increase the frequency of the ghost bus from Elwood to Port Melbourne to more than 9 services a week
Victoria has a hideous shortage of rolling stock which is very apparent on metro lines but hidden on country services by the rebuilding the tracks in northern Victoria. The imported rolling stock doesn’t match with the platform height or width of rail corridor so some lines that have been dual track for 150 years can now only run single track.
It is impossible to increase train services on most lines because the increased services would impede car traffic flow at level crossings beside and across major arterial roads.
When you peruse Lynn Kosky’s CV you can see why she performed so poorly in the Transport portfolio, she has no interest or experience of public transport. She would have only used public transport for the 3 years she studied at Melbourne University and driven to all her work places.
As noted, I think the biggest problem was that the contractor selected had not built a ticketing system before.
That was extremely dumb.
Under investment in Melbourne’s public transport goes back a hell of a long way, far longer than even 50 years. The last substantial rail line built was to Glen Waverley in 1930 (there’ve been a few half-hearted extensions to existing lines since). And half the lines in Victoria use low quality steel rails that often have severe weight/speed limits.
Jeffrey’s privatisation had no long term goal other than getting the whole thing into someone else’s hands, and especially the shedding of huge numbers of staff.
Paul Mees has it pretty well, I think. For decades the transport department has focussed on road, not public transport. And all of the road PPPs seem to have penalty clauses against competition, further restricting longed for improvements as simple as running tram or train services down freeway median strips.
The principle reason that the Middlebourough Road and Springvale Road rails crossings with the Maroondah Highway have finally been separated is for road traffic requirements, not us public transport users. The Glen Waverley line has a couple of crossing with 10k speed restrictions on them that have been there for decades.
How cool would it be if we now had the Inner and Outer Circle lines linking say Oakleigh to Alamein to Camberwell (that part remains) to Fairfield etc? It’s frustrating having to go into Richmond, the Loop, or North Melbourne for instance to get from one line to another.
At least Metro are now making the right sounds, particularly about timetables and scheduling. I think we still have the weird old union requirement of crew changes happening at Flinders St – if not we still have the 5 to 10 minute wait there on what should otherwise be just another 30 second stop. Can’t drivers change at the end of each line?
It’s about time our rail network matched the all but 24 hour city that Melbourne now is.
Kosky’s “bad public image” is all down to the aggressive, anti-Labor, pro-Liberal campaign run by the Herald Sun for the last 12-18 months.
Alex, the Herald Sun didn’t cause Myki to be years late and over budget. Nor did it cause the overfull trains.
Surely the long, long history of poor decision making in the area of public transport (what, 50 plus years?) should surely shake your faith in the idea that ministers, who are only there for (normally) around two or three years, should have any say whatsoever in its running?
Perhaps it is just blind faith that there is, somewhere out there, a perfect Minister and a perfect Party, capable of making the hard choices to raise taxes and spend the money wisely for the benefit of all.
So far, I have seen precious little evidence for this belief.
Andrew, I think the idea is that public transport is actually run by public servants with years of transport-related experience, who give the Minister frank and fearless advice when he (or she) is being a dick.
That’s a model that has worked quite well in the past.
“And all of the road PPPs seem to have penalty clauses against competition, further restricting longed for improvements as simple as running tram or train services down freeway median strips.”
Spot on , Brett. Which is absolutely the shittest thing about the Bracks/ Brumby govts, and one they cant blame Kennett for.
They ought to hang their heads in shame over those PPP contract clauses. What an unthinkable abrogration of their duty to the public.
Quango Lotto: How long before Kosky gets appointed to the board of a PPP?
David,
I would be interested to see an example of it happening. So far, AFAICS – nada.
For me the classic example of ABC bias was brekky with Fran Kelly and Michelle Grattan some months ago.
They spent a few minutes criticising Rudd re losing the ETS vote in the Senate, “Not a good look” was the verdict and then Michelle got onto Turnbull’s meeting with the BCA the day before [this was BG,Before Gretch time].
Turnbull went cap in hand asking the BCA to write their ETS [for both the Opposition and the BCA] amendments for him. You write them, we’ll put them in Parliament, you cheer us on outside Parliament was how Michelle described it.
My version would be that Malcolm was asking to be the BCA sock puppet in Parliament.
Neither Fran or Michelee saw anything untoward about this cosiness.
No “Not a good look”.
Nothing.
It’s been a hell of a long time since the Victorian transport dept has acted as per your version DI(nr). I think the last documented occurrence was with Sir Robert Risson in the 1950s concreting in tram lines so the then government couldn’t remove them.
If anyone should have been made Australia’s first saint, it’s Sir Robert.
I can’t help but be amused by all the people (Herald Sun commenters especially) calling for Metcard to be kept.
As a techwiter (then) I had an interview with the Metcard group when it was just starting up, and was disconcerted to find that the people on the other side of the desk included some I’d worked with before; on a huge Telstra contract where their firm was one of the prime contractors but had been sacked for general incompetence.
I’ll repeat that; the firm they worked for (a multinational computing services company) had been sacked, by Telstra.
Believe me, I saw the writing writ large and was ever so grateful to Swinburne Uni for making me an offer before Metcard did (they did).
That the whole schemozzle has since been repeated with Myki is getting into Oscar Wilde territory.
I’m a Government insider and, in various capacities, have spent hundreds of hours working with Lynne Kosky. Quite contrary to public perceptions, you will not find a senior member of the transport industry who does not regard her as the best Transport Minister that Victoria has ever had. Her handling of the media is characterised by three or four unfortunate quotes, culled from three years of continuous print and media scrutiny, plus a disastrous 2 second film clip in which a myki machine falls apart in the hands of a technician before LK’s eyes. The fact is that she has rescued the regional rail network, overhauled and modernised transport legislation, done more to reform the real (underlying, non-superficial) issues in the taxi industry than Jeff Kennett, and secured billions of dollars of capital and recurrent funding for PT in Victoria. The usage of the system (buses, trains and trams) has sky-rocketed – how bad can the trains be when they have attracted a 50% increase in patronage during the period since LK’s assumption of the PT Ministry? Victorians are being mugged by ideologically motivated journos like Clay Lucas, anonymous sources of acrimonious rentaquote defamation, and self-publicising extremist bullies like Paul Mees.
There is little or no correspondence between the objectively measurable (though not unproblematic) reality of the system’s performance and the artificially generated narrative relayed in the print and TV media. That scares me. Welcome to the Society of the Spectacle.
Oh, and myki might be a PR headache but (a) a new ticketing system was unavoidable, given that the existing system will fall over in 2012/13 as spare parts run out and its (early 1990s) designers withdraw maintenance support, (b) myki has taken no longer to implement than Oyster and Octopus, (c) there is no “off the shelf” solution because, unlike other jurisdictions, we have trams and regional trains (Brisbane’s system cover only 4% of the geographic area of myki and would melt if transposed to Vic).
That’s all very well, Dr Beeching. But Melbourne’s public transport is still atrocious, especially if you live outside the inner suburbs. Then it basically doesn’t exist. I don’t blame Kosky. I blame the Labor government, which as had over 10 years to fix the problem, and hasn’t.
I thought Robert answered his own question.
Lynne Kosky could have identified underinvestment as the problem, and set out to fix it – she didn’t.
Lynne Kosky could have identified mismanagement as the problem, and set out to fix it – she didn’t.
Lynne Kosky could have identified the duckshoving inherent in contractual arrangements as the problem, and set out to fix it – she didn’t.
Within those limitations she might have performed quite well, but she shoulda transcended those limitations if she wants the adulation that her fans regard as her due. She seemed quite happy within those limitations, her fans seem quite happy within those limitations, but the fact that transport users were unhappy doesn’t make them all Liberal stooges. For a start, nobody has any grounds for believing the Libs would have done a better job than Kosky.
Kosky did her best, but her best wasn’t good enough.
Robert Merkel often leads posts against media campaigns in which public figures are crucified for something going wrong in their area. Maybe Lynne Kosky isn’t singlehandedly responsible for the late running of the 6.39 from Ringwood, and maybe Russell Rees didn’t torch Victoria last summer to keep up the high profile of the CFA, but it does lead to an ethereal conception of government where nobody’s responsible but stuff just happens (or doesn’t).
AlexWhite@22: you’re a fool if you think the newspapers have any power at all to shape public opinion.
Dr Beeching, since you are an insider, can you tell us why the government made life so difficult for itself, especially Kosky, by promising that Myki would be operating before the end of 2009. My guess is that an insider said something like “Minister, I can absolutely guarantee that it will be working by the end of the year”, and Kosky took him or her at their word.
Yes, and the government’s approach rally ends up benefiting no one. Not even the car lobby.
Govt cant seem to accept this – but the ONLY way to improve life on the roads for car drivers is to improve public transport.
I see the eastern freeway every morning from the hurstbridge line train and shake my head – bumper to bumper, not moving, every single morning – and a big old median strip, ideal for light rail, unused.
Would be a win-win for public AND private transport users. But sorry, “PPP says noooo.”
Its a permanent slight against Melbournites.
Dr Beeching
Great to have your contribution.
Andrew R @ 28, I guess you’re a lot younger than I am. Prior to Playford getting snowed by a bunch of LA traffic engineers, it even worked that way in sleepy Adelaide. I can remember the tram lines getting ripped up …
‘Unfortunate’ is a euphemism on steroids. It may be unfair but that is the business of politics.
Personally I’m happy to agree that Melbourne is far more complex than Brisbane or Perth. But if this is so evident why, oh why was the original contract for two years? The government can’t have it both ways. Either the original contract was woefully inadequate, or the management of it has been woeful.
I was also going to whinge about pseudonymous posters complaining about anonymous defamation, and then labelling critics as ‘extremist bullies’ but instead I’ll give a hat tip to the nick
(from Wikipedia)
“Govt cant seem to accept this – but the ONLY way to improve life on the roads for car drivers is to improve public transport.”
Actually, the best way to go would probably be for state governments to introduce proper road pricing (congestion charges) and then use the revenue to improve both public and non-public transport infrastructure.
One of the things that happened in infrastructure in Australia over the past fifty years was that in the post war era from 45 to 80, the public sector staffed by hard people rebuilt infrastructure delapidated because of wartime diversion of resources to a war effort. These hard people then not only rebuilt that infrastructure, but also augmented it to cope with a huge post war immigration program.
Thus by the late seventies the public sector had not only dynamic management, but also a deep deep understanding of how to run the various forms of infrastructure, be that transport, water, power etc etc.
However, with the Thatcher reforms, and the retirement en masse of the hard people who pulled the post war infrastructure up by its bootstraps, the mood was to cut expenditure on infrastructure, in order to cut taxes. There was also the attitude that one could cut infrastructure from the public sector – and whenever something was needed, it could be sourced from the private sector. That included the knowledge of what needed to be done if a problem arose.
So slowly over the past twenty odd years under both Labor and Liberal administrations, knowledge was slowly and surely lost from the public sector.
The problem was, that the private sector did not take up the slack in terms of staff development, and retention of knowledge.
We are therefore at the point where the public sector has been de-skilled, and the private sector has not upskilled sufficiently to fill the gaps.
I assert at this point that things are now so bad that the various departments in all states and territories now no longer even know how much they do not know as regards infrastructure. Technical solutions from the seventies and eighties are still being applied in many areas that I am aware of – because nobody now knows any better.
From a political point of view, Governments thought that when they outsourced the infrastructure, they were also outsourcing the responsibility and accountability for that infrastructure.
Ms Kosky’s departure is a warning to politicians that even when they do outsource infrastructure, the public will still hold them accountable.
The problem is now that politicians no longer have the knowledge base behind them to fix the problems. This was let go during the eighties and nineties. Those people who have the technical knowledge are retiring now, and expertise is just melting away.
Mostly support for politicians is now lots of power point and other presentational material. As for doing anything in infrastructure, it does not matter how skilful, honest and diligent a politician is – there is now nothing left for them to rely on in terms of actually doing anything.
The MYKI saga is just one example infrastructure cockups. There is a power infrastructure crisis coming too.
Oh and David I, just wait for the re-doing of the Adelaide water and sewerage outsourced maintenance contract to come up for renewal. I am willing to bet that your eyes will bulge at the increased cost that is going to be your lot – now that there is no ability on the part of SA Water to take it back if the price is too high.
Governments in Australia now are over a barrel as far as getting good technical advice – if Ministers want it, they are not only over a barrel, they don’t even have a choice in the lubricant to be used.
Andrew E
How much room for independent action do you think ministers have in state governments?
I think Robert’s point is not that Kosky has done a good job, but that the failings of Victoria’s transport system are a whole of government responsibility. Brumby and Bracks are probably more appropriate targets of anger than a minister that doesn’t control the size of her own budget.
So, it is not that nobody is responsible, it is that unless you identify those that are genuinely responsible for problems, and the structural impediments to fixing those problems, targeting people like Kosky is pointless. She may be crap, but unless other problems are sorted out her successor is unlikely to do much better.
Yes LO.
Thirty years ago, if there was a problem, not only could the Minister have a series of viable solutions on her desk overnight, the hard people at the top would be able to drill down, find the gaps and fill them, find the malefactors and send them to the office in Ouyen – permanently humiliated.
Now, a malefactor can skip out with their super…and that is if even someone exists that could reasonably be called a malefactor. In most cases there are no technical people left who could be called to account.
The political problem is that governments have allowed this de-skilling and outsourcing. They thought that they had also outsourced the responsibility and accountability. Big mistake. If my train does not turn up on time, I am not going to blame connex – I can’t get my revenge on them. But in that booth at election time, with that stubby pencil in my hand, it is the Government I am going to punish.
Too bad that it might take twenty years to build up that back room support that Governments need. They had it, they lost it. Stand by for more Ministers to look foolish through no fault of their own.
I just observe that the system whereby there used to be a competent public sector enable people who were not technically competent to become ministers of state. I suggest that you might like to consider that little party is now over.
marks @ 42, my grandfather worked for the E&WS in SA. (Never met him really, he died when I was a year old.)
I’m aware of the arse-clenching expense of fixing our sewers and reticulated water. There are a few people who ought to be stood against a wall and shot for what they’ve done.
Yeah, I personally think blaming Kosky is about as much use as switching from Connex to Metro.
LO,
Are you really saying that Labor ministers have no ability whatsoever to push the envelope in any way? Just because you don’t control something, it doesn’t follow that you have no influence whatsoever over it.
I don’t pretend that Kosky could ever have pulled a whole new rail system out of a hat, but I would like some evidence that she tried to do something other than eat the shit sandwich prepared for her. Was there ever a time when Kosky said to Brumby or Bracks, privately or in Cabinet, “please sir I want some more”? Just once?
This is not to say that she has to be some self-defeating boofhead or a Keatingesque dreamer, but surely there are ways of expanding what is possible rather than just showing up to work like some cardboard jobsworth and shuffling off when you’ve had enough.
Andrew, I’m not sure that anyone on this forum is arguing that she did a good job in the portfolio and I am certainly not arguing that ministers have no ability to push the envelope at all. I’m simply saying that if we are in the business of weighing responsibility, a large chunk has to go to previous governments and ministers (these problems have been accumulating for decades) and a large chunk has to go to the people in the cabinet that control the purse strings and the overall strategy of government. From where I am standing that means Bracks (until he resigned) and Brumby. Remember, in practice the way Australia is governed at both a state and federal level has changed enourmously over the past three decades. The centralisation of power and decision making inside leaders’ and treasurers’ offices is enormous.
Oh, and while I am at it, the feds share responsibility as well. The vertical fiscal inequalities built into our federation don’t exactly encourage good governance at the state level. And one of the reasons why it is difficult for states to borrow large sums of money in capital markets without paying a high premium on that borrowing is that markets recognise their constraints in raising revenue. This is one of the factors that encourages inefficient PPPs.
“(b) myki has taken no longer to implement than Oyster and Octopus”
.
I don’t think that’s even close to true. Try for example looking at the Wiki entry
.
In addition (a) Octopus works really well across all forms of public transport, some vending machines, some super-markets etc; and (b) Octopus was implemented more than a decade ago, where it was relatively new technology, unlike now, when it should have been a piece of cake. The fact that the technology already existed for Myki and had been implemented in places in the 90s shows just how uselessly incompetent the current implementors are. The fact that everyone blames each other for it just shows you the problem of no-one taking responsibility for anything.
.
So I think it’s pointless denying that the Myki mess really was a mess. If the government is signing bad contracts, it would be good if they could take responsibility. It’s a pity the opposing party is so hopeless people don’t think about voting them out.
It’s both interesting and amusing to see the transport debate that we have heard a zillion times in NSW playing out in Victoria, with the sole difference seeming to be that in NSW we don’t have privatised trains.
Like Vic, NSW has had decades of underinvestment in rail maintenance and infrastructure, and now the system is bursting with increased patronage.
Like Vic, the NSW Govt also attempted – and failed – to introduce integrated ticketing. It didn’t work because our ticketing system was too complicated, and simplifying it meant that some people would pay more for tickets than they currently do – a political shit sandwich. The rail union of course also didn’t want a bar of it – they’d prefer we keep running the trains exactly the same as we did in the steam era.
We’ll be watching with interest up here to see what happens in Vic.
An interesting tangent – the only rail line to be privately built in NSW was the airport line. It’s a great service, particularly for business customers – you don’t have to queue for a taxi and get stuck in traffic after a long day flying to wherever and back. Only problem is, because it was privately built you are charged a ‘gate fee’ which adds about $10 on to the cost of a 1-way ticket! Consequently it has been totally under-utilised.
re MYKI Just because you have never written a ticketing system it doesn’t mean you can’t write a good one, however a look at software development history will show you that the longer a project takes, the less likelihood there is of success. The Metcard system was written in 1992 to 18994 by Arthur Andersen, now Accenture, and was not Y2K compliant ie the Cobol code stored date in YY format not YYYY format. An oversight perhaps?
I really don’t understand why the geographic area and the mix of rolling stock effects the operation of a ticketing system. Is the data is relayed to a central database in real time, does the database have dual CPUs, what happens to the network if the database is offline. Does this mean that Melbourne can never run a 24 hour transport system because there has to be a maintenance window from midnight to 6am?
Why do you need to clock off a form of transport when we run our zone system. If MYKI needs to know when we leave a tram, train, bus or ferry that’s because its calculating fare by distance. The ticketing system is unnecessarily complex for a 2 zone time based system. As an outer-suburban-limited-public-transport-refugee now living within walking distance of a tram line I do not want to see a return to distance based fares, those people who commute for 90 minutes each way are already penalised
Are the Transport house bean counters skilled enough to understand all the extra data that MYKI can potentially spew out?
To add to Dr Beeching (or is that you Jim Betts?), none of Kosky’s detractors acknowledge the the agency responsible for implementing MYKI, the Transport Ticketing Authority which was run by Vivian Miners (where is he anyway??) has improved significantly under Kosky. And before you start, improve doesn’t mean made perfect but given what she had to work with the improvements have been remarkable. Gary Thwaites and his staff are paid less, spend less and perform better than Miners TTA would know how to.
MYKIs real problems lie with decisions made well before Kosky got involved, particularly the IT architecture and the promises made by spruikers very early on. Kosky didn’t choose Kamco/Keane as the head contractor, she didn’t approve the tender or the contract terms, she didn’t appoint Viv Miners. She did appoint a public servant to run the TTA who has made the agency accountable and almost managed to get the thing working despite the insurmountable architecture problems. Had the Government chosen one of the other two or three suppliers (such as CUBIC which in some circles is referred to as See You Bastards In Court) or bought an off-the-shelf solution which we then tried to stuff into Victoria’s particular system there’s no guarantee we’d be better off.
And what’s the logic that she and the Government are not accountable. Kosky’s political career is over. She’s now out of cabinet, parliament and a job. The Brumby Government will ask voters in November how good a job they’ve done on MYKI. That’s the way our system of democratic accountability works.
Marks, I’m amused by your repetition of “hard people”. I take it these were square-jawed, ripped dudes similar to the ones in Ayn Rand novels? And Kosky’s problem that she was too “soft”?
Billie, the reason why you have to clock off is that pretty much every train route crosses a zone boundary. So if you have zone-based ticketing, you have to check where people get off the train.
Frankly, I don’t have a problem with distance-based charging, provided it reflects the actual cost of providing the service.
sbh: what is the problem with myki’s architecture?
That would be proporietry info Bob but you can see the effect in the things billie raises. Trams aren’t integrated into the system and take some time to update meaning (usually temporary) mischarging of MYKI accounts, frequent reconciliation failures mean MYKIs can take two weeks to upload a payment made on-line, the two to three second delay at touchon/touch off. These are architechture problems and will take either a complete software re-write or significant ongoing work arounds to improve. Public servants did questioned the architecture and its suitability for purpose but their advice was not acted upon.
But to the point, these were all matters Kosky inhereted. I know the Minister is ultimately responsible but it would be worth asking what the TTA board were doing all this time.
I’m not sure that cost of service is the only factor that should be considered. Amenity of service and value of offsetting car travel are two other factors that spring to mind. However I certainly don’t have an in principle objection to some level of zoning.
I do, however, wonder when I look at the mess the complicated ticketing system has created whether it would simply be more cost effective to implement a simpler ticketing system.
I’m not sure why so much attention has been devoted to ‘Kosky: Hero or Villain?’.
As I said up there I’m in no position to judge how good a minister she’s been internally, few are and even fewer who will give a relatively unbiased judgement on the question. And for the reasons others have said I don’t particularly care.
Her PR disasters are not entirely trivial and nor are they a product of a partisan media but they obviously aren’t the main question either.
Fine, the major mistakes predate Kosky. Fine, responsibility is shared across senior government ministers. But the main issues are the policy questions raised above:
What exactly is the value of privatization if it doesn’t save money and the major investments in rolling stock still need political will from the government?
If the government had set ambitious targets for growth in patronage, why is the system struggling to cope when those targets have been met?
If the problem with Melbourne is its complicated system and old infrastructure where exactly is the path to a simpler system with more modern architecture?
Why exactly has Myki been so poorly implemented? Why were we (seemingly) unable to learn from the lessons of the Metcard implementation?
Does zoning make sense when it’s just going to add complication and cost to the formula? I remember awhile ago Zone 3 was abolished, which caused an uptake in use of the trains in those suburbs. But the silly government hadn’t though about that consequence and just expected the service to carry more passengers without more trains. Maybe they should just make it free. After all, how many billion has Myki cost to implement?
I read once that if you total the ticket infrastructure, labor and set up costs, it wouldn’t cost anymore to have no tickets at all. That’s what “public” transport should mean. Infrastructure upgrades could be paid out of petrol tax revenue, of which only a third or a quarter actually gets spent on what its supposed to anyway. (Or how about money saved by, let me see now, taxing four wheel drives at the same rate as normal cars, or money spent on military me-tooism, or abolishing negative gearing).
No that’s right. We give tiger woods millions and have fund raising telethons for the children’s hospital.
In short Government spending priorities are totally screwed and voters are too myopic too demand change. Bring on benevolent dictatorship I say!
“Bring on benevolent dictatorship I say!”
Effective opposition would be a start.
“The Brumby Government will ask voters in November how good a job they’ve done on MYKI.”
.
Only in part. I think they’ll go “if you think we’re useless and incompetent, try looking at them”. That worked for Bob Carr in NSW for years, so even if they stay in, it doesn’t mean they did a good job.
.
“Had the Government chosen one of the other two or three suppliers (such as CUBIC which in some circles is referred to as See You Bastards In Court) or bought an off-the-shelf solution which we then tried to stuff into Victoria’s particular system there’s no guarantee we’d be better off”
.
It’s hard to see how it could be worse. Octopus cards seem to work just fine in a system far more complicated than here, so I really can’t see why it should have been such a hard project. It’s not going to Mars after all. Of course, as per usual for the Victorian government, everything is now kept so secretive we’ll never know, and it will always be someone else’s fault. In addition, if Kosky has gone because of this, perhaps they should have said that, rather than “family reasons” or whatever it was. Of course, that would admit responsibility, and they wouldn’t want that, would they?
In New York, a lot of the early subway system was built by private operators. In many places, trams and buses were privately operated and the competition meant a great deal of convenience for customers — more frequent pickups and dropoffs etc.
And don’t forget that in the early days, trains were almost entirely private enterprises. The industrial revolution was not a government project.
While that’s true, Jacques, the great majority of those companies went broke pretty quickly, and got snapped up (usually) by govt. That’s why, until fairly recently, Britain’s rail system was publicly owned, and the US’s might as well have been.
In Sydney ticket prices are affected by distance travelled nad time of travel, so that purchasing a single ticket to Manly in peak hour from Wynyard costs more than if purchased at noon.
MYKI clearly was designed to have the capability to charge fares based on time of travel as well as distance travelled when our politicians have clearly stated the zone system is hear to stay. Somebody is lying!
As Martin B succinctly said the cost of travel on public transport needs to include carrots for using public transport if it takes 5 times as long as car travel, as it often does, and is less comfortable and less safe than car travel.
As for MYKI — I am not familiar with that particular project. However, software projects with budgets over $10 million USD have a less than 1 in 20 chance of succeeding, according to the Standish Chaos Report.
Otherwise put: if you want me to predict the success of a large software project — whether it will be on time, on budget and on spec — I will ask you how much you propose to spend. If you name any figure over ten million bucks I will tell you it is doomed to miss its targets, collect my fat consultation fee, and head off to the next job.
David;
Companies going broke is part of capitalism. It’s expected and necessary (though unpleasant for parties concerned).
Yes, but if a railway goes broke nothing moves. That’s why governments took them over.
Essential infrastructure is not something you can afford to have in private hands, for a number of reasons. If you doubt that, just look at Telstra, or the electricity industry in some states. It’s about as stupid as having a privatised Defence Force.
David,
Nonsence. The reason the government took over (in the UK at least) the successful private enterprise rail system and then proceeded to systematically underinvest, cut back and generally stuff it up (notably thanks to Beeching’s “reforms”) had nothing to do with failing enterprises and everything to do with ideology.
For those of us who had to use public transport in the UK the results are completely clear.
Andrew, did the UK government take the railways over in the first instance for ideological reasons or because they were already in trouble? Beeching didn’t have anything to do with it until well after the acquisitions.
Helen @ 53
Good question.
What I meant by the term ‘strong’ was the way the traditional PS adviser would give frank and fearless advice, would tell the Minister if they were doing something idiotic, yet absolutely leave the final decision to the Minister or Cabinet, and then implement whatever that decision was…and if necessary, help to clean up the mess.
I was trying to contrast that with the approach common in the eighties in Australian Government circles where Ministers were treated a bit like the Russian Imperial Court treated the Tsars. Whatever they wanted, no matter how stupid, was increasingly not questioned, contrary advice was less frequently tendered, and compliance was often pretended. A culture thus grew up in many Australian essential infrastructure areas of ‘if they pretend to resource it, we’ll pretend to do it.’
Thus someone like Ken Henry today is more seen as an oddity in public sector circles today rather than the norm.
Too many advisers to politicians were so weak and wibbly-wobbly at the knees that they dared not articulate the need to update infrastructure both human and material since that would require increased tax.
Sorry Helen, I hit ‘submit’ too soon.
As to the Question of whether Kosky was too ‘soft’. Short answer – nope.
In the Westminster system of Government, anyone theoretically can aspire to be a Minister because they have the expertise of the public sector (and anyone else they want to get to advise them) behind them.
However, when the technical expertise in Departments has been allowed to disappear, then who the heck can a Minister turn to for reliable, robust responses to anything from Parliamentary Questions to long term strategic plans, to crises of supply of services? It does not matter now who the Minister is going to be – the number of people they can call on for that robust advice is now pretty small, and evaporating daily as those trained in the seventies take retirement.
That being said, the Government and its Ministers are still responsible and accountable – they just now have little control and support to enable them to discharge those responsibilities.
Jacques @ 67
Indeed companies do go bust as part of the capitalist system.
However, as part of the democratic system, we the voters can choose to direct our representatives that certain services not be interrupted. Water, transport, power, police, schools, medical, telecoms etc etc are examples of that. If that means if those services are not able to be provided on a continuous and reliable basis – we will require our representatives to solve the problem somehow.
Whether that solution is a capitalist or socialist one is not of concern to most of us – however, when companies providing those services start to fail you need not be surprised if Government starts taking over…..and the cycle starts again.
That must be why I buy my food from the government supermarket.
I suspect, with a high level of confidence, that the Brumby government election pitch strategy will be considerably more defensive.
We can direct them to do whatever we like. Maybe they will. Maybe they won’t, because they know we have no alternative. Instead they might underfund maintenance and use the money to buy votes with wave pools and by hiring more spin doctors.
Look at the areas of highest government intervention: health, education and public transportation. All these are widely accepted to be total shambles in most places most of the time. Look at other life-or-death services like the provision of food and pharmaceuticals. They’re heavily regulated, certainly, but it’s a regulated market rather than a government enterprise.
Privatisation doesn’t work because governments are not interested in privatisation. They’re interested in making a quick buck before the next election begins to ramp up and they need some cash quick-smart. Businesses are not interested in competing if they can help it, so a dirty deal gets done where they get a legal monopoly. And then, somehow, that’s the free market’s fault and the old public service was flawless. Apparently because it was run by Santa Claus.
My partner just commented that Kosky really is copping a lot of vitriol.
This reminded me that the most disappointed I was with Kosky was in Education, not Transport and really was completely unfair. It was when she was briefly threatening to deregister Uni Melbourne Private if they didn’t lift their game. In the cold hard light™ this was probably ministerial pressure at its best, but since actual deregistration would be one of the most spectacular acts by a state Labor government, reality is bound to disappoint.
“And then, somehow, that’s the free market’s fault and the old public service was flawless. Apparently because it was run by Santa Claus.
Flawless? Hardly! LOL!
That’s not what I was trying to say…and since I know you are not wanting in understanding, I suspect you know that.
It is a question of the connection between who we believe ultimately is responsible for ensuring these services are provided and the ability of those responsible to do something if there is a problem.
A lot of pollies in the 80s and 90s thought that by outsourcing these services, they also divested themselves of the responsibility and accountability. What they find with these services is that they have not divested themselves of the responsbility and accountability at all – they have merely divested themselves of the ability to control things they are still responsible and accountable to society for.
The problems in Darwin with the Casuarina Substation clearly illustrate that keeping something in Government hands does not guarantee perfection. LOL. However, it does mean that Government can do something and be seen to be doing something about it.
On the other hand, the SIHIP scheme is pretty much entirely project managed and delivered by the private sector. Government gets to pay the cheques and that is about it. How many houses built by those private sector builders, architects and project managers? For how much money so far? Of course since there is almost no expertise left in Government in that sphere Federal or Territory – there’s nothing they can do about it. The SIHIP scheme is a showcase of what hundreds of millions of your tax money will achieve under private sector management.
Jacques – the vast majority of US passenger rail infrastructure was bought up and run down by oil companies.
Can you guess why?
It demonstrates that governments are just as prone to skimping on maintenance to squeeze out a short-term surplus (aka profit) as stupider businesses are.
Some interesting points re the success of major IT projects Jacques. You’re right of course about private capital building railsways around the world but Australia has historically built its raikl networks with public money. Both occured for sound economic reasons.
I should have asked earlier, can any of the proposers of the ‘off the shelf’ solution suggest who sells system-wide multi-modal smartcard ticket systems?
Fine, is that a whippet? Ooh I love whippets, so handsome, so fast, so sweet natured. The prince of dogs
SBH why does multi-modal add to the complexity? I can see that multi-owners adds to complexity. I imagine that appalling data analysis or information engineering has created a complicated database design with perhaps transactions that are updated on the database at midnight through to 6am. The database complexity would make the programs difficult to understand, spec and ultimately write.
While the current SA ticket system is not particularly smart, it deals with multi-modal travel quite well.
It’s the only admirable thing about our public transport, in fact.
Kosky’s personal reputaion and the inherent complexity of Melbournes PT are both eminently defensible subjects.
What is not defensible is the way the implementation has been completely beyond the terms of the original contract. Which is presumably why none of the defenders of the government have addressed this point, other than vague comments about mistakes being made pre-Kosky.
Billie, it means the system has to cover three transport systems with dicrete destination, routes and zones and adds to the complexity. A single mode/ single zone system is simpler than what we have.
David, isn’t adelaides system a mag stripe not a smart card? Can it be used for anything other than travel on public transport?
Martin B you are dead right but I don’t think my comments were vague. To recap in case I wasn’t clear however, Why has the board of the TTA not been forced to answer for their dismal performance, Or Jim Betts (sorry, I meant Dr Beeching) and why was Vivian Miners allowed to slink away without accounting for his actions? What I have said is that Kosky managed to turn the TTA around and MYKI’s implementation has improved since she’s been in charge. It’s still a sh*t sandwich but it’s better for her efforts. And before I get slagged as a defender of the Government or Kosky I’m not but there’s no point chasing the wrong bunny.
Fair enough. Objection withdrawn.
I don’t buy the arguments about complexity. It’s not like London has a simple transport system — it’s got 11 fare zones (6 inner plus 5 outer), and half a dozen different modes of transport (tube, bus, DLR, etc) — and Oyster works pretty well, with a far greater volume of use than Melbourne would ever see. (Oyster is also touch on/touch off, like Myki.) So what makes us so special?
SBH would Melbourne’s public transport ticketing system work better with a single zone covering all commuter areas like Melbourne metro, Geelong, Ballarat, Bendigo.
That would reduce complexity!
Sounds like the destination lookup table [or equivalent] is a bottleneck. So clearly the MYKI system was designed with the capacity to charge by distance travelled. Is the MYKI system designed to charge higher rates for peak hour travel. Yes, according to the Letters to The Age today MYKI charges pensioners $3.30 Mon to Fri and $3 on Saturday
If you’re worried about the user pays principle, remember that only a few roads are toll roads so motorists don’t begin to pay for the cost of their transport
Oh, the other ‘be kind to Kosky’ matter I was going to mention was the brief ban of bicycles on peak hour trains. IIRC this happened over summer while she was on holiday, she returned, publicly supported the decision but got it overturned 6 weeks later. Ok, it shouldn’t have happened in the first place, but as far as I can tell from the outside she handled it perfectly appropriately from then on.
Ok, I’m getting out of my depth here and hopefully someone can come and correct my mistakes and explain it fully.
But AFAIK, the difference is that in London (and elsewhere) every journey is separately fared and every fare is point-point. As a result the system works with the main information being stored on the card. All a machine needs to know to calculate the fare is the balance, and where the last journey started. The central server is only periodically updated with system information.
In Melbourne, on the other hand, a single fare can run across multiple journeys and, even more importantly the ‘best fare’ may depend on the recent history of usage, not just the last touch-on point. As a result the machines need to communicate with the central server to be able to calculate a fare, and this is where the additional complexity is.
David Irving @ 83,
You will therefore be ecstatic to know that because Adelaide’s ticketing system has no problems and is really simple, there are rumblings about replacing it.
Personally if I were Minister I would not touch that one with a barge pole unless I thought I was going to lose the next election, whereupon I would start a very hi tech replacement to leave for the other party to try to implement.
These ticketing systems and utility customer information systems are poisoned chalices of the worst order.
(Were I writing the Cabinet Submission proposing any of them, I would triple the cost and timeframe, and halve the projected benefits likely to accrue).
London had to build their system from scratch as we do but I’m guessing they organised it better. Admitedly MYKI is much smaller than london (remember bigger doesn’t neccesarily mean more complex) but it is still a huge and complex tender. We can’t say how MYKI will work when its finished, I hope really well, this threads really been about why it’s taking so long to get there. If we get a system like octopus or oyster (which is what is aimed for) it should be great and we’ll all love it.
Billie you’re right but I understand that one of the pre-tender decisions was that a single fare system would not be implemented. I don’t know enough to say whether it would have been better that way or not.
Thanks, Martin. But I still don’t see it. Oyster has daily fares (for various zone combinations) too, which being time-based and not point-to-point are functionally equivalent to our 2-hour/daily tickets. I don’t understand your point about the best fares. If it’s so complicated wouldn’t it make sense to store all that information on the card itself — since it was used to touch on and touch off, it would know everything it needs to know about your daily usage. Wouldn’t it? (Oyster card does the best daily fare thing, too.)
On the other hand, if it really is our fare system that is the problem, perhaps we could have changed that instead of making the technology needlessly complex.
Martin B and sbh thanks for your comments. I was only half joking with my single zone comment.
At the moment Metcard selects the best fare. When you swipe you 2 hour 10 trip ticket for the second time in 24 hours the expiry time is not 2 hours hence, it is 3am on the following day.
Brett, perhaps the reason for not storing fare information in the smart chip is fear of fraudulent tampering with the data stored on the chip. Especially increasing the balance on the chip. Australia has a reputation for devising very inventive methods of avoiding payment when using pay phones, some of the methods like dropping a coin sticky with superglue not only gave everyone free phone calls but were very expensive to fix.
But then why do banks store information on the smart chip on my credit card?
As I said, sbh, it’s not real smart, but it’s adequate.
“SBH would Melbourne’s public transport ticketing system work better with a single zone covering all commuter areas like Melbourne metro, Geelong, Ballarat, Bendigo.
That would reduce complexity!”
So what exactly is wrong with this idea? I’m glad you were only half-joking Billie, because this has legs.
Why not charge passengers on a per-km basis, and that’s it? Each day of travel, the system records all swipes, on and off, and makes the (trivial) calculation of how far each card has travelled on the network, whether it be by bus, tram, train, ferry or dirigible.
Just work out a non-linear system to determine the rate per km, so those with a long way to go aren’t too badly disadvantaged, and what’s the frickin’ problem?
It’s like tax brackets – since the discovery of algebra, why do we have such lumpy, clunky, bullshit maths governing our lives? What’s the matter with a curve for fuck’s sake?
FDB why would I catch public transport if it charged on a per kilometer basis.
TIME Often the journeys I take by car take 10 minutes. To take the same journey on public transport I may have to schedule an hour or more to complete. There is one trip I used to do that took 30 minutes by car but I would have to assume it would take 2 hours by public transport as I would have to factor in 20 minute waits at each hub. In Canberra I would have to factor in 50 minute waits
CONVENIENCE the individual has to wait at the bus stop for public transport I can drive my car when I am ready
SAFETY People get mugged walking home from the tram stop, no one is mugged in their garage. I don’t have to sit in quiet fear of the 16 year old thugs. No one catches trains on Friday night after dark
COMFORT I have a seat when I drive, I don’t stand for the hour long trip, evading flying school bags
DISEASE No one coughs over me in my car, I don’t have to breathe in your stale food fumes
COST of driving is negligible once I own the car
PARKING is where public transport comes into its own
If its considered socially desirable for people to use public transport then make it desirable/cost effective. Before Zone 3 was abolished it was impossible to get car parking at the stations in Zone 2 after 7:15 am. Look at the number of cars parked at Brighton Beach station – the end of zone 1. Count the numbers of cars that drive from the outer suburbs to the start of the tram tracks.
Wow, I’ve been ranting incoherently to strangers at parties about this for years…
LO,
I’m taking the trends you describe as given, and I’ll ignore your implicit sneering at my naïvete. The issue is not whether you dare to dream of a better world. The issue is, what do you do given such an environment?
What sort of relationship do you have with people like Brumby, and (let’s expand the field of operations a bit) Eric Roozendaal, Andrew Fraser, Eric Ripper et al.? Can you make the case for increased expenditure without having your credibility completely shot? Kosky got a lovely send-off from Brumby but I would have thought more highly of her had Brumby done so between clenched teeth.
Plenty of Labor people thought Peter Costello was gutless, but none of them outwitted him sufficiently to come through with the goods: no Latham-style firebrand nor any Keneally-style courtesan managed it. While you don’t get all the blame for putting up with such an environment, you don’t get any kudos for doing so either.
There was a time when governments invested heavily in social infrastructure. That time has long gone – in fact, underinvestment in infrastructure has been the norm for so long that it is becoming unsustainable. If you believe, as I do, that investment in infrastructure will become imperative then it follows that those politicians most deserving of respect are those trying – ever so gradually, not wanting to appear to be rocking the boat – to turn things around and provide sound and sustainable public services.
Just because tabloid media went too far in criticising her doesn’t mean that any and all criticism is unfair. It is fair to criticise someone for having a great opportunity and doing too little with it. Being a marginalised bomb-throwing ratbag need not be the only other alternative to being a bland soulless jobsworth. She could have make Brumby and Bracks choose between her and the TTA board foisted on her – subtly perhaps, or brazenly, whatever works eh.
marks was partly right – whenever a train was late/dirty/whatever, Kosky seriously thought it was good enough to flick the problem to Connex. It isn’t good enough, it isn’t worth being a minister if that’s the job description, and Kosky should not have sacrificed herself and her credibility in the name of perpetuating such a situation.
Where marks is wrong is that the “hard” advice he so admires was that the peasants can do more with less, what why would you invest in infrastructure when you can just roll out another “transport strategy” and spin, spin, spin.
Jacques,
I know that you only come here to lecture and not to be sullied with information counter to your theories, but there are a few issues with what you’ve said that explain why not everyone regards them as self-evident.
“In New York, a lot of the early subway system was built by private operators … And don’t forget that in the early days, trains were almost entirely private enterprises.”
They received both significant taxpayer largesse and slack regulation, and still went broke, forcing the conundrum that it is better for the state to operate such services if for no other reason to recover sunk costs and realise raised expectations. The industrial revolution was largely, but not exclusively, a government project. It is another example of the error of dualism in understanding the private and public sectors of the economy.
As for the “government supermarket” – when you consider agricultural subsidies, planning concessions and the retailer’s role as tax-collector, all supermarkets are largely, but not exclusively, “government supermarkets”.
The Australian pharmaceutical market is so drastically affected by the PBS, Medicare and the regulation of pharmacies in ways that the US market is not that is renders your argument pretty much invalid for Australian purposes.
Health, education and transport have high expectations placed upon them and fall short of these. Not all criticisms of these facilities is necessarily well-informed or even valid. Falling short of perfection is not of itself evidence of a shambles. Those institutions are held together by people who work much harder and for longer hours under worse conditions than, say, many bankers and lawyers and I have never seen an adequate explanation from you or cited by you as to why people do this. The failure to examine this motivation and its rewards was and is a central weakness of libertarianism.
I am still waiting for the Jacques Chester/Sinclair Davidson/Chris Berg/Jason Soon epistle as to why total fire bans are a nanny-state outrage. Get cracking boys, the autumn is almost upon us and you can’t make it through a Melbourne winter without a bit of enmity to keep you going.
To be fair, there has been a reasonable amount of investment in the public transport system get under way under Kosky, most notably the Tarneit link. Yes, a lot of the money is coming from the feds, but Victoria got its act together to get the dough, unlike certain other state governments…
… like NSW, Robert, which is why the government of that state is too heavy a burden for the incumbents, who are full of Koskyesque jobsworths (by “Koskyesque” I mean Lynne, not Barry, which might explain why myki cards are not dildo-shaped).
Is one line, to Tarneit and not say Narre Warren, “reasonable”? How so? “To be fair” to whom?
Andrew E @ 101, although I think our politics are usually diametrically opposed, here we are in complete agreement.
As a related aside, our [cough] government Colesworth Supermarkets turn primary producers into price-takers (and they have to provide their own lubricant).
“As for the “government supermarket” – when you consider agricultural subsidies, planning concessions and the retailer’s role as tax-collector, all supermarkets are largely, but not exclusively, “government supermarkets”.”
Man, that is a dumb argument. Agricultural subsidisies in Australia are amongst the lowest in the world. So, because governments make space available for supermarkets via planning laws and because there is a GST levied on some (not all) food products supermarkets are largely government supermarkets? You have to be kidding. Does that make me a government employee if the government levies an income tax?
Some of your earlier arguments make sense but you blow your credibility out of the water with that guff…
And Andrew – again, nobody is suggesting that Kosky is deserving of praise for being a particularly effective minister, nor that she deserves no criticism. The point is that the criticism has probably gone too far given that she bares a small proportion of the total responsibility of the mess that is public transport in Victoria.
No one is going to upgrade infrastructure unless you can assign $ cost benefits to the project. So, unfortunately, no one is going to spend money improving public transport for commuters to improve quality of life.
When the next Port of Melbourne is built at Westernport the container port to rail/road transfer yard will be built at Cranbourne / Narre Warren. So why did Tarneit get a rail line? What industry is out there? It’s the Labor heartland, who do the inhabitants of the south east vote for?
I don’t get why people reckon Myki would be any harder to design than existing smartcard systems. (Or for that matter, why it’s turned out to be.) Perth’s had the Smartrider for probably 4-5 years now, and after the bugs got ironed out in the first few months, it’s worked great ever since. Our system’s multi-modal (bus / train / ferry) and has 9 zones, the zones being defined by distance from the city centre. (Zone 1 <10km from the city, zone 2 10-20 km away, etc – fares calculated by how many zones you pass through.) There's even a feature that caps a day's travel cost at the price of a day ticket (so if you commute in from the outer suburbs and then home again, any further travel that day is automagically free). Martin B at 90's last para is reality here.
Kosky got public transport as a shit sandwich handover from Batchelor. Cabinet set the far too low budget for infrastructure upgrades. No suburban train line has been built in Melbourne since 1930.
A private public transport system. Spot the oxymoron.
1b on a crap ticketing system that is a negative to users (trips will cost more, is too complicated, poorly implemented, hard to use). The only winners are those raking in the revenue.
1b on Southern Cross station. Nice roof which does keep the rain off, but its about to be swamped by Docklands buildings. We would have been better off with a combined office/commercial/residential/open plaza building on top of it. And a metro station underneath it. An opportunity lost, and very little real benefits to users.
Where are the missing rail lines to over 2 million additional Melbourne residents?
Where is the inner city metro – rather than sluggish infrequent trams?
Where are the integrated safe and convenient bike paths?
Where are the transport maps that show you how to use the system (colour coded tram and rail routes) rather than what the fare structure is?
Kosky’s major fault was that she just rearranged the deckchairs. But I think Pakula as her replacement will too.
The problem lies with a succession of Liberal and Labor state governments with zero vision for public transport. It is just an annoyance to them.
Agree Bird of Paradox!
Clearly MYKI was specified by corrupt, incompetent officialdom at Transport Ticket Authority or Ministry of Transport or both.
The money has disappeared in consulting fees, contract rates to programmers, testers, systems architects, system designers and their software houses rather than hiring the people directly. The principals of these authorities and consulting houses have charged obscene fees and a minor sum has been spent entertaining key politicians on extravagant overseas junkets.
The saying “you can’t make a silk purse out of a sow’s ear” is apt here as clearly MYKI is plagued by system architecture problems like reconciliation difficulties, unable to read tickets as people leave trams that make the functionality complex and error prone. FACT – The programs fall over before testing starts. I have no idea whether the programs conform to the principles of good software design or whether they are a nightmare to maintain.
“SAFETY People get mugged walking home from the tram stop, no one is mugged in their garage. I don’t have to sit in quiet fear of the 16 year old thugs. No one catches trains on Friday night after dark
COST of driving is negligible once I own the car”
Billie, I have to disagree with you re these two points. 295 people died in car accidents in Victoria last year. God knows how many 1000s were injured. Exactly how many people were killed and injured whilst using or waiting for public transport? I catch trains after dark on a Friday night and they’re always packed. I find the idea that pt is incredibly dangerous very weird.
And cost of driving negligible? Add up rego, petrol, parking, servicing, cost of tyres, getting the damn thing fixed when something goes wrong with it. It’s thousands per year. Public transport is still comparatively cheap.
I also find some journeys much quicker on public transport because of gridlock. Of course, if we had a better system, if would be even faster.
And sbh, that is indeed a whippet and she is the princess of dogs. Without any annoying, princessy attitudes.
Peter C @ 109
“The problem lies with a succession of Liberal and Labor state governments with zero vision for public transport. It is just an annoyance to them.”
Actually, it has pretty much been a fiction in Western Democracies that Governments have vision.
With notable exceptions such as Curtin, Whitlam, Hawke, Keating, Howard etc most vision comes from the public sector advisors.
Most ministers would not know diddly about their portfolios before taking them on. Now I emphasise that is not a criticism, since it enables anyone in our democracy to aspire to the highest offices.
In that sense, any person who is voted in and becomes a cabinet minister, can sit in cabinet, and when a curly problem comes up, refer back to their department for development of strategic plans and visions etc etc. Which they then announce as the Government’s Strategy or Vision.
However, having gotten rid of most PS policy and technical people in the eighties, politicians now have no means of articulating any vision they may have – or at least translating that into any coherent action.
And the electorate voted for that.
If we have stuffed services, no point in blaming the Public Sector for incompetence. There is no-one really left to blame in the area of infrastructure. The lights were turned out years ago – it is just that people are now starting to notice.
Fine, if I lived in Hawthorn through to Lilydale I would find Public Transport faster than car travel but like most Melburnians I don’t go into that corridor and I find door to door transport by car faster than PT.
Most Melbournians don’t work in the CBD so they drive to work.
Do we need public transport?
You could say the only school kids and people too poor to drive to work catch public transport, in which case, why worry about public transport.
I would prefer to argue that the more people use public transport, the less carbon pollution, the longer the oil reserves last, the less traffic congestion, but Geez catching public transport is an uncomfortable, frustrating, time consuming chore not a convenience so lets make it considerably cheaper than driving a car.
Can we put more rolling stock into the Melbourne system to increase frequency? I doubt it. There are already bottlenecks for trains at level crossings over major arterial roads and their offramps, for trams on St Kilda Road.
LO@105:
If you come in late to an argument, you’re going to take it out of context. Jacques still believes that the best way to understand the world we live in is to cleave the private sector from the public. The very idea of Hayek scribbling The Road to Serfdom during one of the biggest public-sector initiatives in history – World War II – is hilarious to me, uncomfortable for Jacques. You live in a mixed economy LO, and my guess is you’re comfortable with that in a way that Jacques isn’t.
Supermarkets in Australia receive favurable treatment from government which distorts the retail market so much that it is a form of impost on the community.
Farm businesses should be compared with non-farm businesses. Next time a shop closes its doors in your street, keep an eye on it to see if Lee Kernaghan shows up to sing one of his pitiful songs about it.
And LO – you miss my point about Kosky, I’m beginning to think it’s deliberate. So some criticism is over the top – isn’t it always? Isn’t it part of the job? She deserves no credit for being a small target, nor for accepting and working happily within a situation that she could have made better in some small way (not just transport policy – relationship with Premiers/Treasurers/private sector etc.).
Two final points: it’s “bears a small proportion”, not “bares”, and my credibility was and is not girt by any water to be blown out of.
“So some criticism is over the top – isn’t it always? Isn’t it part of the job?”
No
“Supermarkets in Australia receive favurable treatment from government which distorts the retail market so much that it is a form of impost on the community.”
Actually that favourable treatment is relatively small, so in no way justifies the implication that supermarket chains are de-facto government businesses. I hate hyperbole and I think the point that you were trying to make about the benefits of a mixed economy and the way that the public sector provides the framework in which many businesses thrive could have been made in a much better way.
Socialist Alliance throw their electoral hat into the ring for Altona, targeting public transport (naturally).