Two Sundays ago Prime Minister Scott Morrison announced that the 2022 federal election will be held in just over four weeks, on Saturday May 21.
With public transport largely a state matter, this election is less important for Melbourne public transport than the Victorian poll due in November. Especially for a blog that concentrates on service aspects.
However federal elections still matter. Even for transport services, albeit indirectly. Federal governments collect most of our taxes. State governments do most of our spending. There are substantial federal - state grants for transport infrastructure projects that state governments couldn't fund on their own.
Federal government of all stripes have enthusiastically funded roads. Their attitudes to urban public transport infrastructure has varied. The Howard and Abbott governments funded little if anything. Whereas the Keating, Rudd, Gillard, Turnbull and Morrison governments can point to funded public transport projects.
Federal funding of transport infrastructure can drive service improvements that would not have occurred otherwise. For instance the bus reform in Werribee and Geelong that followed Victoria's Regional Rail Link or on the Gold Coast following the tram's opening and extension. Bus service reform is possible without rail infrastructure but it wouldn't necessarily been as good or comprehensive.
The role of infrastructure in stimulating service growth and reform is magnified where you've got a very infrastructure-focused state government such as Labor in Victoria. In such cases not having major infrastructure as an impetus can mean almost no service reform at all; if it was a gene bus reform would be as recessive as you can get. Even here there's no guarantees, for instance the the new station at Southland or numerous suburban rail-road grade separations occurred without complementary bus network reform.
Experiences from 2019
Federal promises don't always get honoured. Projects that get federal funding need to be both feasible and supported by the state government. Otherwise they might not happen or be built where not needed. This has been the experience of some transport promises made before the 2019 federal election by the Liberal Party (which retained office despite previous unfavourable opinion polling).
The most famous example has been the station car parks promised under the so-called Urban Congestion Fund. Promises have been made without suitable sites being identified, resulting in some projects being abandoned. The program was found by the Commonwealth Auditor-General to be a rort, with funding being funnelled to marginal seats rather than on a needs basis. And even if the latter was applied, park and ride is a very expensive way to boost train usage, costing tens of thousands of dollars per passenger gained. Whereas alternatives like bike paths and better buses are more cost-effective and deliver useful local access improvements that park & ride does not.
Earmarked federal funding counts for nothing if Canberra only kicks in a fraction of what's needed and the state government isn't particularly interested. A recent example is Baxter rail electrification with potential benefits for a couple of federal seats then considered marginal. Canberra's $225 million is nowhere near enough for the state to jump at it. It remains to be seen whether this offer will be scrapped, reaffirmed or increased in 2022, noting likely increased skepticism given the lack of progress since last time.
More optimistically we've seen revived interest in Melbourne Airport Rail which has long been wanted by frequent-flying business and opinion-writing elites for decades. While the rest of us might only occasionally use it, airport rail polls better than (say) Melton, Wyndham Vale or Clyde electrification as a good project to build. The latter lower profile projects may contribute more daily trips but suffer from their benefits being more geographically concentrated. Commentariat promoters of airport rail might also claim intangibles like 'being good for the state', 'fostering tourism' or similar. Unlike with Baxter, airport rail looks a goer; the feds' contribution ($5b) has been matched by the state with an announced start year of 2029.
Victoria's battleground seats in 2022
See Antony Green's 2022 electoral pendulum here. According to this our only really marginal Liberal seat is Chisholm in Melbourne's middle-east (around Box Hill - Glen Waverley). This is on a 0.5% margin. The current member is Gladys Liu.
A 5% anti-government swing would also see Casey and Deakin fall. Chisholm, Deakin and Casey form a contiguous finger stretching through Melbourne's east and beyond out to the Maroondah and Warburton highways. This is a bit like the state pattern where after the 2018 Victorian election the metropolitan marginal belt has swung to this corridor. A 6% swing would make La Trobe and Flinders vulnerable. These are again eastern and south-eastern Melbourne suburban and peri-urban fringe seats.
On the other side, Corangamite (Geelong fringe and rural districts) is Labor's weakest seat. A 1% swing would see them lose it. Labor's second weakest is the Frankston-based Dunkley with a 2.7% buffer.
In practice swings are rarely uniform. This election is really 151 seat-by-seat elections with different dynamics in each seat. Seats that appear marginal may hardly swing while those not on the marginal list might return a new member with a double-digit swing.
Notable in Melbourne are challenges in its wealthiest Liberal-held seats by so-called 'teal independents' campaigning on climate change and integrity issues. Seats that could come into play here include Kooyong (current member Josh Frydenberg) and Goldstein (current member Tim Wilson). Meanwhile, the incumbent independent Helen Haines will need to fend off a Liberal challenge in Indi, in north-east Victoria.
More seat by seat analysis on The Tally Room.
2022 public transport promises for Victoria
What will be promised in the next five weeks in the public transport sphere? The campaign is still young. And Victoria may not be seen to be as big a political battleground for marginal federal seats as other states such as NSW and Qld. However there may still be promises.
Incumbent governments (whether state or federal) should be judged on their competent design, planning and management of existing programs (eg pork barrelled station car parks in dense suburbs some of which have been found to be unfeasible). Whereas non-government parties need to convince voters that their schemes are desirable, practical and affordable.
While concentrating on services, some of the seat-by-seat wish lists in my 7-part state election series do include rail infrastructure projects like Baxter and Clyde rail electrification. If these become part of federal campaigns and promises I'll note them below as details come to hand.
Liberal
* Melbourne Airport rail & faster Melbourne - Geelong rail (10 year infrastructure plan)
National
Labor
* $2.2 bn for Suburban Rail Loop (only a small percentage of total cost)
Greens
* Cheaper electric cars & phase out fossil fuel cars
* Public transport and high speed rail
(Palmer) United Australia Party
One Nation
Smaller parties and independents (including 'Voices for' and 'Climate 200' candidates)
See individual candidate websites and social media
Bicycle Network's list of promises by party.
(more to come as further information becomes available)
No comments:
Post a Comment