[U/C] M2 North-South Motorway

[Wayno]

I agree claybro. I'm politically agnostic and 9 of 10 fingers point at the state govt.

[rev]

If you want to get political, you can blame both sides of politics stretching back decades. Why? Because a north-south freeway/motorway has been needed for decades. Right now it's at the critical stage. I dare anyone to disagree, then I suggest they spend the day simulating dry runs between random businesses across Adelaide, sticking to the speed limits.
Both sides of politics, federal and state, could have done something to fix South Road properly. No side of politics did, until now.
And now we have a stoush between federal liberals and state labor about planning studies and funding and whatever other bullshit. This is why I hate politics and politicians.
Because while they argue and point the finger at each other, nothing gets done and we suffer.
And lets not pretend that this isn't to do with state politics exclusively. The state government is trying to stay in power and keep the liberals out, while the federal liberals are trying to hurt the state labor government to benefit the state liberals. That's the bottom line.
Now lets not buy into this crappy game of politics, and simply demand that they get on with the bloody job of improving our city's and states infrastructure.

[Jaymz]

Let's hope this gets done. And I for one am more than happy for it to be a toll road. Let's move into this century and
stop thinking we live in some overgrown country town.

[[Shuz]]

It took them two years to develop that!?

It could take a group of university students 6 weeks to present the same thing!

Half of the information is stating the blindingly obvious, and the other half is just regurgitating the same point over and over again.

It seems to me the $10m spent was just basically to cover staff wages and nothing else. Complete and utter incompetence strikes DPTI again.

Shuz this is how governments operate.

I know how government operates. I spent four years in State Government. It's all about paper shuffling, long lunches, and convoluted bureaucracy. Nothing ever sticks to the brief, gets done on time, or on budget. The way some departments operate just simply would not be tolerated in the real world.

Ive since moved into the real world. A private firm would have delivered twice the content, in half the time and on budget.

[rubberman]

It took them two years to develop that!?

It could take a group of university students 6 weeks to present the same thing!

Half of the information is stating the blindingly obvious, and the other half is just regurgitating the same point over and over again.

It seems to me the $10m spent was just basically to cover staff wages and nothing else. Complete and utter incompetence strikes DPTI again.

Shuz this is how governments operate.

I know how government operates. I spent four years in State Government. It's all about paper shuffling, long lunches, and convoluted bureaucracy. Nothing ever sticks to the brief, gets done on time, or on budget. The way some departments operate just simply would not be tolerated in the real world.

Ive since moved into the real world. A private firm would have delivered twice the content, in half the time and on budget.

Actually shuz, the evidence is clear that private firms are costing huge amounts of money. I have worked in both private and public areas, and seen some shocking ripoffs of the taxpayer by private firms. All quite legal of course.

I have no doubt that you are correct, that they could deliver twice the content in half the time and on budget, but they don't. They charge like wounded bulls. That is, yes they do it cheaply as you say, but those savings are not passed onto the taxpayer. Indeed, why should a private firm pass savings onto the taxpayer? A private firm is not there for the benefit of the taxpayer, it is there for the benefit of its share holders. Almost all work is done by private firms, from investigations right through to final construction. So if things cost a lot, that's where most of the money goes right now. Almost nothing is done by government except dither.

In this case the reason for the dithering is because every time anyone suggested a Freeway (sorry for using the F word folks), all the NIMBYs have come out swinging and killed the idea. Blaming politicians for doing what the public wants is a bit rough in my view. Even now, we can't call this thing a F***WAY (shhhhhhhh), it's got to be a convoluted form of words that mean the same thing. I mean if we were to point out that this is pretty much what the MATS Plan was going to do, it would probably cause a bit of a problem...so let's not go there.

[jase111]

Ijamie briggs speaking today at a infrastructure luncheon
In South Australia we are eager to invest in more projects, especially along the North South Corridor.

This week the South Australian Government released the North South Corridor Planning Study.

We welcome the release of this report, which was suggested and funded by the Australian Government.

Given this is the first time we have seen the final report, I have now sent this to Infrastructure Australia to seek their advice on what sections of the corridor should be prioritised for funding.

The Australian Government is fully committed to delivering the North South Corridor and we look forward to working with the South Australian Government to do so but we will need advice from the South Australian Government about how they intend to fund it.

It is vital, though, that tolling options—especially for heavy vehicles—are considered as a source of funding, and we will keep discussing these options with the South Australian Government.
If a State Government rejects alternative financing—whether it be tolling or asset recycling—that state then becomes wholly reliant on a finite amount of government resources to deliver new infrastructure. And that finite money is competing against other interests such as health and education.
Get ready for a change in policy otherwise this will be a pipe dream like mats and the electrification of the whole network plan from eight years ago

[claybro]

Get ready for a change in policy otherwise this will be a pipe dream like mats and the electrification of the whole network plan from eight years ago

Dont hold your breath. It's easier to just blame the Feds for prioritising other states projects....you know, the other states that have had the cods to introduce tolling over the last 50 years or so.

[rev]

Get ready for a change in policy otherwise this will be a pipe dream like mats and the electrification of the whole network plan from eight years ago

Dont hold your breath. It's easier to just blame the Feds for prioritising other states projects....you know, the other states that have had the cods to introduce tolling over the last 50 years or so.

There'll be a toll introduced on the northern connector to make it financially viable.
Because 1) the state doesn't have enough money and 2) the feds wont provide all the funding.

It's just a matter of how they will announce it and how much spin.
If I'm not mistaken, the transport industry in this state supports a tolled northern connector.

And don't be surprised if there's tolled lanes for heavy vehicles on the rest of the north-south corridor projects from the Torrens river southwards.

[[Shuz]]

I don't get where politicians think this aversion to tolls comes from? The transport, freight and logistics industries support it, and I'm pretty sure the overwhelming majority of the general population supports it, if it means getting this corridor built sooner rather than later!

[Waewick]

I don't get where politicians think this aversion to tolls comes from? The transport, freight and logistics industries support it, and I'm pretty sure the overwhelming majority of the general population supports it, if it means getting this corridor built sooner rather than later!

people, talk to the vast majority of people who can't see outside their own realm, and they are against it!

[phenom]

I think the anti-toll attitude has become needlessly entrenched here in SA. Both major parties have become locked into one upping each other on the issue. Admittedly, it's driven (fairly) by some of the more egregious deals done in the eastern states which were clearly bad deals for taxpayers.

Recognising SA's lower incomes (and vehicle numbers), I would hope sanity prevails and any tolls reflect:

- an attempt to partially offset the cost of the road rather than make a profit out of it (ie accepting that a fair chunk of the cost should still be funded out of general revenue)
- biased towards charging freight which has a clearer economic gain from more efficient roads; and
- that in SA it's likely there will be few alternatives to the NS Corridor

I would hope that we could get something sensible pricing wise. Off the top of my head, something like 20c per segment of the NS Corridor and maybe only applied during peak hours. It's all possible to do easily now with modern technology and hopefully even AdelaideNow commenters could understand that paying maybe $1 each way to save $2 in fuel and 15m in time is more than worth it...

[claybro]

WA is about to introduce tolling for heavy vehicles on a major new transport route to assist freight travelling from the industrial areas adjacent to the airport to the Ports. SA will then be the only mainland state without some form of tolls. Infrastrucure Australia has made it quite clear for many years, that there is funding available to SA provided it can commit to "alternative" ie tolls revenue to help fund new roads. There is some resentment from the other states, that the poorest state SA, which holds out its hand for the most Federal funding in terms of population, is also the only one with no tolls. Had a state government in the past with bi-partisan support from the opposition allowed tolling, then South road would already be well on the way to nearing completion.

[rev]

I think the anti-toll attitude has become needlessly entrenched here in SA. Both major parties have become locked into one upping each other on the issue. Admittedly, it's driven (fairly) by some of the more egregious deals done in the eastern states which were clearly bad deals for taxpayers.

Recognising SA's lower incomes (and vehicle numbers), I would hope sanity prevails and any tolls reflect:

- an attempt to partially offset the cost of the road rather than make a profit out of it (ie accepting that a fair chunk of the cost should still be funded out of general revenue)
- biased towards charging freight which has a clearer economic gain from more efficient roads; and
- that in SA it's likely there will be few alternatives to the NS Corridor

I would hope that we could get something sensible pricing wise. Off the top of my head, something like 20c per segment of the NS Corridor and maybe only applied during peak hours. It's all possible to do easily now with modern technology and hopefully even AdelaideNow commenters could understand that paying maybe $1 each way to save $2 in fuel and 15m in time is more than worth it...

The north south corridor should be built with the clause that tolls will be installed on certain lanes ONLY, and that it will be MANDATORY for heavy vehicles to use those lanes ONLY. That way ordinary motorists do not have to pay a toll. The transport industry SUPPORTS tolled freeways. The public does not. So there's the solution right there.
Ordinary motorists will be happier as well with that situation as they wont have slow truck in front of them.
Tolled lanes can be speed restricted to 90kmh, non-tolled lanes for ordinary motorists can be 100kmh.

So fucking simple. Yet so bloody difficult in this state with all the bullshit politics and arguing and "me me me me" attitude of people in this state.

[Waewick]

I think the anti-toll attitude has become needlessly entrenched here in SA. Both major parties have become locked into one upping each other on the issue. Admittedly, it's driven (fairly) by some of the more egregious deals done in the eastern states which were clearly bad deals for taxpayers.

Recognising SA's lower incomes (and vehicle numbers), I would hope sanity prevails and any tolls reflect:

- an attempt to partially offset the cost of the road rather than make a profit out of it (ie accepting that a fair chunk of the cost should still be funded out of general revenue)
- biased towards charging freight which has a clearer economic gain from more efficient roads; and
- that in SA it's likely there will be few alternatives to the NS Corridor

I would hope that we could get something sensible pricing wise. Off the top of my head, something like 20c per segment of the NS Corridor and maybe only applied during peak hours. It's all possible to do easily now with modern technology and hopefully even AdelaideNow commenters could understand that paying maybe $1 each way to save $2 in fuel and 15m in time is more than worth it...

The north south corridor should be built with the clause that tolls will be installed on certain lanes ONLY, and that it will be MANDATORY for heavy vehicles to use those lanes ONLY. That way ordinary motorists do not have to pay a toll. The transport industry SUPPORTS tolled freeways. The public does not. So there's the solution right there.
Ordinary motorists will be happier as well with that situation as they wont have slow truck in front of them.
Tolled lanes can be speed restricted to 90kmh, non-tolled lanes for ordinary motorists can be 100kmh.

So fucking simple. Yet so bloody difficult in this state with all the bullshit politics and arguing and "me me me me" attitude of people in this state.

I don't agree with the North South Corridor being tolled - I'm all for tolled roads but only on new roads.

I'm not a fan of splitting it, sure we have the technology by why add the headache, the SA public needs to be educated that if you want to keep using your car the you need to pay for it

what we also need is a state government that can roll out PT to cover areas where the car is the only option, give we are all but broke, can't see that happening.

[claybro]

The north south corridor should be built with the clause that tolls will be installed on certain lanes ONLY, and that it will be MANDATORY for heavy vehicles to use those lanes ONLY

So much simpler if we are to toll only heavy vehicles- to toll the heavy vehicle on any part of the road, otherwise the single heavy vehicle lane will become completely blocked. We have the technology already with vehicle recognition cameras, and even the police are equiped with cameras that alert them to out of registration licence plates. Transport companys can be billed monthly based on how many times their vehicle passes certain toll points on the motorway-these could be spaced every 5km or whatever. That way, any vehicle can use whatever lane suits depending on traffic conditions.