What’s Wrong With The PTUA?

The following letter, written by Tony Morton on behalf of the PTUA, appeared on The Age Online on Saturday, and was probably published in print as well:

The Great Train Myth

Melburnians should not have to put up with lousy public transport indefinitely, contrary to what is suggested in your article (”Public control? Not likely”, 1/7). It simply will not do to assert that “regardless of who operates the train system … there will be delays and cancellations”, as if our choice is between a poorly managed privatised system and a poorly managed public system.

This is the myth by which our reluctant Minister Lynne Kosky hopes to make the public swallow an extension to Connex and Yarra Trams’ franchise contracts.

What the Government doesn’t want the public to know is that many cities manage to run their public transport without chronic delays and cancellations, and carry more passengers with less infrastructure and at less cost. And virtually none of them operate with the franchising model we have. Even Britain, where we got the model from, is looking at a return to public operation for its trains.

TONY MORTON, secretary, Public Transport Users Association

Source: The Age - Saturday, 7 July, 2007

Tony Morton and the entire PTUA seem to enjoy living the constant fantasy that all will be well under government-run public transport system. The perception held by their group seems to be one that if and when the state government assumes command of the system, every problem currently facing the system will be corrected overnight if money is simply poured into the system.

Hypothetically, assuming the state government were to take control of the system today, the following would happen:

• There would be the same number of drivers and other frontline staff
• There would be the exact same number of train sets, trams and buses
• Infrastructure would remain exactly the same
• Timetables would be no different
• It is highly unlikely that monthly performance would be made available to the public (this only occurred due to privitisation)
• Fares would remain at their current level

And it’s unlikely that very many of these things would change in the near or far future. Staff numbers could possibly increase, however older drivers may consider early or normal retirement if a government package was offered. Rollingstock would only increase if delivery of new stock was taken, which would not happen within 18 months at the minimum. Infrastructure upgrades to improve service frequencies or allow improved timetabling again would not happen within 18 months. Fares would remain unchanged, however would increase with CPI as they have done for many years.

In order to accomplish these things, at any bare minimum level, the state government is going to have to invest many millions of taxpayers money. Rollingstock isn’t cheap. Neither is infrastructure upgrades. Line upgrades and extensions take several years of planning and construction - and then require more rollingstock to service them (keep in mind that the Melbourne train system is already at stretching point, and will be further once the Craigieburn extension opens later in 2007).

Morton fails to realise that we are NOT the United Kingdom. We are Australia. Clearly if Connex and Yarra Trams are seeking to extend their franchise contracts, they are clearly happy with arrangements in place. Clearly the Government are reasonably happy as well.

Furthermore, I doubt the “many cities” he cites have the fare evasion levels Melbourne currently has, which has a culture of fare evading.

Once again, comment from the PTUA which does nothing but put forward a baseless and ill-informed argument with little supporting information or facts.

Recently the PTUA published a “study” on their website claiming that for the most part, Melbourne had the highest fares in comparison to other major cities in Australia.

We compared public transport fares from Melbourne, Sydney, Brisbane, Canberra, Adelaide and Perth. By looking at rail fares from various suburbs, we were able to compare the costs of travelling into each city’s CBD.

The figures (as at June 2007; which includes the Melbourne price-rise on 3rd of June) are shown in the graphs below.

They show that for public transport trips under 40km, Melbourne is the most expensive city in Australia, apart from some short trips which are more expensive under the flat-fare systems used in Canberra and Adelaide. Trips over 40km are comparatively cheap, helped by the removal of zone 3 in March 2007.

Source: PTUA Website

While this may well be the case on the surface, the study doesn’t take into account service frequencies and delivery, nor does it properly consider different fare models used in different states. Unless otherwise stated, all services listed below are via train. Please read the fare notes at the bottom.

Adelaide vs Melbourne

Gawler sits approximately 41km’s from Adelaide CBD, and Werribee sits approximately 35km’s from Melbourne CBD. Comparisons are based on a full journey to or from Gawler to Adelaide and Werribee to Melbourne.

It should be noted that a number of services on the Gawler line terminate and start short. Additionally, several services on the Gawler line run express on the weekend, skipping several stations.

Frequency Comparison

Fare Comparison

A full fare return ticket from Adelaide CBD to Gawler costs $7.20 (Daytrip), which allows unlimited travel on trains, trams and buses, and is valid up until 4.30am. A full fare return ticket from Flinders St Station to Werribee costs $9.90 (Zone 1+2 Daily).

Brisbane vs Melbourne

Beenleigh sits approximately 35km’s from Brisbane, the same distance as Werribee from Melbourne.

The Beenleigh line includes a small number of short workings during the afternoon. Additionally, prior to the peak there are a small number of express services and a fluctuating frequency.

Frequency Comparison

Fare Comparison

A full fare return ticket from Brisbane CBD to Beenleigh costs $8.80 (Zone 1 to 7). A full fare return ticket from Flinders St Station to Werribee costs $9.90 (Zone 1+2 Daily).

Canberra vs Melbourne

Canberra does not have an inner-city rail service, instead relying solely on buses. This comparison therefore is rail vs bus.

Gunghalin is approximately 25km’s from Canberra CBD, while Glen Waverley sits approximately 26km’s.

Bus Route 58 does not appear to operate between 2pm and 8pm on weekdays, instead being replaced by another route which operates at an approximate 45min frequency.

Frequency Comparison

Fare Comparison

A full fare return ticket from Canberra CBD to Gunghalin costs $6.60, which allows unlimited travel on buses throughout the day. A full fare return ticket from Flinders St Station to Werribee costs $9.90 (Zone 1+2 Daily).

Perth vs Melbourne

Armadale sits approximately 35km’s from Perth CBD, as does Werribee from Melbourne CBD.

On Sunday’s, the Armadale line has a frequency that alternates between 10 and 20 mins. Trains alternate between express and stopping all stations for most of the day.

Frequency Comparison

Fare Comparison

A full fare return ticket from Perth to Armadale costs $7.70 (Dayrider), however this provides unlimited travel only after 9am on weekdays. A full fare return ticket from Flinders St Station to Werribee costs $9.90 (Zone 1+2 Daily).

Sydney vs Melbourne

Campbelltown sits approximately 58km’s from Sydney CBD, while Pakenham is approximately 61km’s from Melbourne CBD.

On weekdays, the line has a 30min frequency in the morning, however this increases to 15min after about 12.30pm.

Frequency Comparison

Fare Comparison

A full fare return ticket from Central to Campbelltown costs $12.40. A full fare return ticket from Flinders St Station to Cranbourne costs $9.90 (Zone 1+2 Daily).

Fare Increases

In June 2007, the Victorian Government increased public transport fares in line with CPI.

From July 2007, the Queensland Government will increase public transport fares. The ticket shown in the Brisbane comparison will cost $9.20.

From July 2007, the South Australian Government will increase public transport fares. The ticket shown in the Adelaide comparison will cost $7.70.

Notes On Melbourne Fares

The Full Fare Zone 1+2 Daily Ticket described allows unlimited travel on all train, tram and bus services across Melbourne from the time of purchase up until 2am. Any equivalent 2-hour ticket purchased after 7pm is valid up until 2am. Sunday Saver tickets allow unlimited travel on Sundays for $2.50. A Seniors ticket allows unlimited travel on all train, tram and bus services for $3.10. Under certain circumstances, seniors are entitled to free travel on Sunday.

Compared to some fares, the Melbourne fare model provides better value in some instances.

Information on distances, travel times, frequencies and fares sourced from Google Maps, Metlink Melbourne, TransAdelaide, TransLink, ACTION, Transperth and CityRail.

Money Doubt On Third Rail Track To Dandenong

MELBOURNE’S biggest rail project, the $1 billion Caulfield-Dandenong third track, is in doubt.

There was no money for the new tracks announced in the state budget. The $37 million “first stage”, included in the budget, was for extra train sheds in Cranbourne.

The State Government said on Friday the expensive third track would be delivered, but rail experts are not so sure.

The third track is to allow country and suburban express trains to overtake “stopping all stations” trains on one of Melbourne’s most trouble-plagued lines.

But the project has long been criticised by the Public Transport Users Association, transport academics and the Opposition, despite being supported by the Department of Infrastructure and train operator Connex.

A source close to the Government told The Sunday Age that he knew Treasurer John Brumby had commissioned a review because he was not convinced it was value for money.

“That’s why they’ve gone a little bit quiet on it in the budget,” he said.

Melbourne University transport academic Paul Mees said he was not sure if the Cranbourne sheds were a good idea. “Cranbourne is 14 kilometres from the nearest bit of the proposed third track,” he said.

Although there were third tracks on the Box Hill and Frankston lines — which, unlike Dandenong, do not carry country trains — a third track to Dandenong would be a waste of money.

“It’s not sensible to spend a billion dollars to deal with a problem that could be fixed if they just timetabled the trains properly,” he said.

“As any poor bugger who tries to get on at Glen Huntly on the Frankston line can tell you, having a third track hasn’t helped.” Dr Mees said that two tracks or four tracks on a railway were workable, but not three. “Third tracks can, in fact, never be justified on competently run rail services,” he said. “How do you get the trains back to the end of the line to provide an extra trip?”

Dr Mees also said Dandenong timetables placed V/Line country trains just before all-stations suburban trains instead of after, as in past timetables.

This resulted in slow country trains through the suburbs, and disrupted suburban trains.

“I know it’s hard to believe they could be as dopey as they are, but they are,” Dr Mees said. “In 1985 they were bright enough to work out how to get a V/Line train through without stuffing up the suburban trains, and they seem to have forgotten.”

In particular, the third platform at Oakleigh was not being used. If it were, all-stations trains could begin at Oakleigh, and trains from further down the line could run express. “It’s sitting there waiting to be used like they used to use it in the 1980s and the early 1990s, and they’ve just forgotten about it,” Dr Mees said.

He said overcrowding on the line was due to cancelled trains, not lack of track capacity.

Daniel Bowen, of the PTUA, backed Dr Mees’ assessment, slamming the sheer cost of the project and the “humungus” disruption it would cause while being built. “We say single tracks should be duplicated first before you start looking at third tracks,” he said.

“There is a view on some of the busiest rail systems in the world that triplication is a big cost for not much extra benefit.”

Upgrading the Dandenong line might involve rationalising the timetable, and should involve signalling upgrades so the trains could run close together. “All of these sorts of issues need to be looked at before you blow $1 billion on an entire third track,” he said.

A Department of Infrastructure spokeswoman said Dr Mees’ suggestion of a 1985 timetable was not practical.

“Today, hundreds of thousands of people live in the outer south-east of Melbourne beyond Dandenong,” she said. “In order to cope with the rising demand on the Dandenong line beyond 2010, extra track capacity will be needed.

“Even with improvements to timetables, the line will not be able to cope unless new tracks are provided.”

The spokeswoman said that not all trains running into the CBD needed to return to Dandenong for the services required for peak times.

Some services would come into the CBD and be used elsewhere in the network. Sheds at Cranbourne were a legitimate part of the third-track project.

Source: The Age - Sunday, May 6, 2007

Once again, Bowen shows his professionalism with words like “humungus”. Of course there is going to be delays and inconvenience with the construction of any new infrastructure to do with public transport. Someone building a new office block is going to have to block off a road to allow essential work to take place. The local supermarket renovating the interior of their shop is going to temporarily inconvenience shoppers. So what? The outcome is for the better, is it not?

Clearly in this case, Bowen just wants to have a whinge and get his name in the paper.

A year ago, Bowen stated:

“Revamping signalling and timetables and introducing passing loops where there’s available land, like in Oakleigh, would be much cheaper.”

Source: Green light for $1b rail project, Herald Sun, April 6, 2007

Both the PTUA and Bowen claim that there are much better ideas to improve the Dandenong corridor situation, with a focus on improved timetabling and provision of passing loops. Since when has either been an expert in transport timetabling? Train timetables are put together by a expert team of people over a period of MONTHS. Putting together a document to operate a train system the size of Melbourne’s is not an easy task, and can’t be done overnight. But clearly the PTUA know better.

The comments from Mees don’t really help either. Just because you have a piece of paper from a university saying you’re smart doesn’t mean you actually are. It just meant you wrote all the right words in the correct order and submitted it on time. Any dopey bugger would know that.

Inspectors Have A Ticket To Write

Tram ticket inspectors are out to cath 1950 fare cheats every week. A leaked email from Yarra Trams Revenue Protection Unit showed staff were expected to check 40,000 passengers for tickets each week on 3100 trams, netting 1950 evaders.

Spokesman for Yarra Trams Colin Tyrus denied ticket inspectors were under pressure to meet a quota and rejected the idea that inspectors bullied people without a ticket. Tyrus said that January email, leaked to 3AW radio today, merely indicated staff had a number “target”.

“If we check 40,000 passengers a week, then that will probably result in a certain number of reports of non-compliance or tickets being issued,” he said.

He said no penalties were imposed on staff if targets were not reached and there were no bonuses for inspectors who issued extra fines.

“We hope that everyone has a ticket and the actual result is zero (fines).”

Transport Minister Lynne Kosky backed Yarra Trams.

“There are targets for the people who work there, but they’re not quotas,” she said.

Public Transport Users Association president Daniel Bowen said having ticket inspectors chase quotas might force inspectors to pick on innocent people.

Source: mX - Monday, April 23, 2007

Another fine example here of an ill-thought out comment from Daniel Bowen that adds nothing to the article and only incites readers to get the wrong impression. Why would ticket inspectors pick on innocent people? An innocent person is going to be in possession of a valid ticket, or have a reasonable and acceptable excuse for not having one. No ticket inspector would waste their time issuing a report against someone without being able to prove or justify themselves, as it is going to come back to bite them on the arse later on - especially if a LOT of them come back.

A new look to ptua.net. This time around I’m going to use this to highlight the stupidity of the Public Transport Users Association. Stuff will appear as soon as the PTUA provide me with the material.