[U/C] M2 North-South Motorway

[rev]

They could take on more debt to fund this and other intrastructure but politically its too much of a risk..staying in government and keeping their jobs are more important. The state governments debt is low overall.
They spend around $7 billion paying public servants..just how many are there and/or how much are they getting paid? Theres a handful of them who are paid more then the Premier.

Playing it safe all the time wont help us. Who was the premier when we industrialized and massive infrastructure was undertaken? I recall reading our debt hit around 70%..the world didnt end then..but today with our relatively low debt some want ys to believe we are doomed if we take on a little more debt.

[rubberman]

That would have been Sir Tom Playford, Liberal and Country League Premier, rev. So +1 for the LCL.

However, at that point, private debt in the State was very very low, so that State Governments could borrow much more as a percent of state final demand.

Private debt became astronomically much higher during the Prime Ministership of John Howard. So -1.

The reason that private debt is relevant is that if private debt is low, overseas borrowers will lend more to government on the basis that they can raise taxes in order to pay off the loans. If, however, the public is already in debt up to its eyeballs, then the amount of money government raises via taxes is limited severely, Overseas borrowers, seeing that it is harder for governments to pay off the loans for that reason will balk at lending the same sorts of amounts that Sir Tom Playford was able to.

As an aside, I had a few idle hours the other day and went for a bus ride down South Road to Marion Shopping Centre, just so I could see what all the fuss was about. It was actually not all that bad off peak, and only starting to get annoying about 4pm. While it probably is an issue during the peak, the question is starting to form in my mind as to whether or not we really do need to spend as much as some people want. Sure it would be nice to have a freeway or everything totally grade separated, but is that affordable?

But like the NBN, maybe it needs some more thinking about and reporting and delaying?

[zippySA]

Interesting point you raise rubberman. If I recollect, an upgraded N-S corridor saves something like 12min travel time (assuming you travel the full extent - not really sure where this is measured from but expect it would be the most optimistic / beneficial number to support the business case). So yes, when multiplied across thousands of freight movements, this amounts to a lot of theoretical saved time, but I would be pretty confident that we the consumer will see no drop in prices for goods that arrive at their destination 12minutes sooner - if there are incremental savings, they will surely go straight to companies profit line.

I've always supported a full N-S corridor - but actually wonder now - why is it so critical, and why do we continue to support vehicles so heavily. A N-S corridor meets the traffic demand for another period - say 20+ years (I would hope for the cost), but what then? Ultimately - vehicles are part of the problem as well as part of the solution, but we shouldn't put all our eggs into one basket. There are lots of ways to alleviate the issue - not just throwing squillions at non-stop road corridors (unless we are preserving the corridors for future intelligent transit systems - some potentially that we haven't even thought of as viable yet but may emerge within the life of these major roads).

[[Shuz]]

Intelligent transit systems?

Hmmm. I can think of one called... walking!

[Amused]

Intelligent transit systems?

Hmmm. I can think of one called... walking!

I will indeed remember that next time I am running late trying to get from Modbury to Bedford Park... Sounds like a handy tip.

[claybro]

Interesting point you raise rubberman. If I recollect, an upgraded N-S corridor saves something like 12min travel time (assuming you travel the full extent - not really sure where this is measured from but expect it would be the most optimistic / beneficial number to support the business case). So yes, when multiplied across thousands of freight movements, this amounts to a lot of theoretical saved time, but I would be pretty confident that we the consumer will see no drop in prices for goods that arrive at their destination 12minutes sooner - if there are incremental savings, they will surely go straight to companies profit line.

just a point here Zippy, is it necessarily a bad thing if companies increase profit from better efficiency of an upgraded road? It is in the state's interest for our local companies to be profitable...more tax, more employment, less waste of resources. Why should a company reduce its price to a consumer just because they have benefited from a less costly tramsport environment. What about the amount of fuel saved for private motorists each week not negotiating stop start traffic? Less accidents? What about all the adjacent roads that intersect with South road. OK..a vehicle travelling along the length of South Road might only save 12 mins, but what about all the reduced light sequences on the intersecting East/West roads. Imagine the time saved at the likes of HBR intersection, or Port Road or Richmond road for East/West traffic. Plus the amount of extra vehicles an upgraded South road take off the likes of Marion/Holbrooks/East/Kilkenny rds. We really need to look at the bigger picture and not just look at South road as an isolated arterial, but a corridor that can unblock the shambles in the Western Suburbs, and with sypathetic planning,acutally improve the look of a large part of the western suburbs into a modern, functional attractive corridor...sure beats the eyesore that exisits now.

[rubberman]

Those are fair comments Claybro.

However, do they all add up enough to justify the cost of upgrading...given the amount of money that has already been spent?

Has a Cost Benefit Analysis been done for upgrading the rest of South Road?

The new Federal Government has spent a lot of money on some of its promises, is likely to eliminate the carbon tax, and the mining tax, it has given $9Bn to the Reserve Bank, and it is going to cut company tax, so it needs to look very carefully at other spending. I don't want to get into Gonski or the NBN issues, but what is clear is that given that the Coalition has increased spending in some areas, and is committed to reducing taxes. And that doesn't even include addressing the deficit, which some have thought important to reduce. Putting it bluntly, can we afford any work on South Road.

So looking at expenditures on transport infrastructure such as South Road is entirely in line with looking at Gonski and the NBN. And, given their statements before the election about the need for cost benefit analysis of projects such as NBN, they would certainly be consistent were they to call time out on South Road funding till a cost benefit analysis was undertaken - quantifying the issues you have quite rightly pointed out as being important.

They have not yet announced such a review, but in light of Gonski and the NBN and their fiscal issues, it is only a matter of time. (My guess is that they will delay it until after the SA elections next March - before that, of course, they will swear that there will be full funding, and some will believe them, no doubt).

[claybro]

However, do they all add up enough to justify the cost of upgrading...given the amount of money that has already been spent?

Classic Adelaide mentality....Cant afford it, dont really need it, lets analyze it to death, blame the Federal government and hope it all goes away. consequently Adelaide now has THE WORST suburban road ifrastructure in Australia. Adelaides arterial roads are choked with heavy transport and have become ugly polluted wastelands. Meanwhile, in all other capitals, heavy transport and commuter traffic is channeled onto freeways/highways, leaving local arterial roads for local traffic and the developement of some beutiful urban villages and precincts. In Adelaide, we still bang on about our wide arterial roads and variety of alternatives to various locations as if this negates the need for high speed/large volume roads. Adelaide will be unable to improve its urban environment until we stop relying on our arterial roads to provide for the bulk of commercial traffic.

[rubberman]

Yes,yes, Claybro.

That's what people say about the NBN too.

That's what everyone says about their pet projects.

All I am saying is that economic conditions are worsening, taxes are going down, expenses are going up, as is the deficit. So where do you see the money coming from?

Other projects like the NBN are being reconsidered, so why should South Rd. be exempt?

[claybro]

Difference is rubberman, that the Federal government went into the last election promising 2 things VERY CLEARLY....fibre to node, and focusing infrastrucutre spending on road bottlenecks. FTTH. v FTTN issues aside, they have given no indication their priorities have changed. If the pedal comes off the continuation of our N/S corridor, it will be because of the rediculous dithering and navel gazing that goes on IN THIS STATE, and blaming the Federal government either Labour or Liberal is not right. The NBN is a national issue, of which we have very little control, no matter our viewpoint. South road however is our baby...The money for south road has been offered up at various levels for years, it is our lack of cohesive vision -plans for state funding and rediculous lack of state planning from both sides that has ended up with our metropolitan and country roads being the worst in the nation.It is the reason our suburban communities have to contend with high streets that are heavy transport thoroughfares .It is the reason we now have to somehow contend with creating a corridor, whilst still maintaining local cross access.It is part of the malaise that holds this state back. That both parties in SA, ever imagined 20-30 years ago we would some how not need a proper transport corridor serving an area of 100km long and 20km wide with a projected population of 1.7 million is beyond me-perhaps they envisaged teleportation by now.., and it seems, most at the Federal level concerned with such matters are just as bewildered.

[rubberman]

Claybro,

I am not going to disagree with you. Most of what you say is correct.

However, as you point out, there has been very little strategic planning done here for the past forty years. So, election promise or not, is it wise for a Federal government to pour any money in?

Due to vertical fiscal imbalance State governments cannot do what is required without the Feds. Google it if you don't believe me.

All am doing is connecting the dots between: taxes being cut, other expenditures being undertaken (eg 9 Bill to the RBA), no strategic plan for Sth Rd, an ever increasing deficit, and coming up with the answer that unless a project is tightly documented and justified to the Feds it is under threat.

Fine, if you want to blame successive State governments, but that does not a CBA make,nor does it make the heart of the treasurer any less flinty.

[Norman]

According to the DPTI, there is now a new transport corridor study being undertaken, this time from the Glenelg Tram Overpass to the Southern Expressway. They should be releasing something between now and March 2014.

[Amused]

Crikey, I'll be interested to see what they plan to do with that stretch. Narrow with commercial on both sides and numerous side roads... sounds like a dog's breakfast.

[muzzamo]

Crikey, I'll be interested to see what they plan to do with that stretch. Narrow with commercial on both sides and numerous side roads... sounds like a dog's breakfast.

Before the election it will be an unfunded tunnel.

After the election it will be a tunnel funded with tolls. My guess.

[zippySA]

Muzzamo - I'll back your guess - that's how I would play it if I was running the show. Time will tell - they are asking a lot of work to try and have something for the election period. I reckon we are about to have a crazy election given one gov is ready to anything for a 4th consecutive term, and the opposition seem to fear they won't get in unless they come up with their own massive set of promises.

Working in the industry - it promises to be a fun election - leave paying for it all to another time!