Tuesday, December 06, 2022

7 ticking transport timebombs that incoming ministers should know about


Although it's become more contestable, providing policy advice to the minister remains a key role of government departments such as the Department of Transport (soon to become Department of Transport and Planning).

A particularly important time for this is just after an election when a new government is formed. Potential outcomes could include (i) different party different minister, (ii) same party different minister or (iii) same party same minister.   

Incoming government briefings, known as red and blue books, are prepared by the department to reflect the likely result, which, notwithstanding the gradual decline in the major party vote, will either be a Labor or a Coalition-led government. 

Labor's victory means that the 'red book' will be used. 

These 'books' advise the incoming minister on how they can implement their promises and key long-term issues facing the portfolio. They are a time for the department to shine with 'frank and fearless' advice less tempered by short-termism or political considerations as might become the case later. Or, less charitably, it could be interpreted by Yes Minister fans as being the first opportunity for the experienced bureaucracy to mould a callow minister. 

We don't know the full contents of these books, though Infrastructure Partnerships Australia has made a summary of Labor's announced promises. They call this a 'red book' though the genuine document from the Department will have vastly more background on key issues and challenges.  

Should incoming government briefings be made public and subject to Freedom of Information? Bureaucrats have argued that they should remain protected cabinet documents. Their fear is that publication of advice could result in it being made less frank than it should be, especially if it could embarrass the government (which may hold unclear or different views on matters). Making advice less frank could potentially reduce its quality and lead to the incoming minister not being told about what they need to know. 

Yesterday's announcement revealed little change in the public transport portfolio with Jacinta Allan keeping infrastructure/SRL and Ben Carroll keeping public transport. However Melissa Horne gains roads and road safety with Josh Bull getting a parliamentary secretary role. Sonya Kilkenny becomes Planning minister with this moved in to the portfolio as part of 'machinery of government' changes. The relative stability means that both main ministers responsible for public transport have a head start due to experience. So much less will be new to them compared to if new ministers were starting.   

Below are seven issues that I think incoming transport portfolio ministers and any parliamentary secretaries need to know about. The first arises from an election promise while the remaining six are long-term festering issues. All will get worse if not addressed in this term. However addressing them will make public transport more useful, accessible, reliable and cost-effective than it is now. 

I will sometimes cite political vulnerabilities that a department briefing might skirt around. This is often virtuous as genuine community needs and good politics sometimes match. Nevertheless some suggested savings and revenue measures will be controversial. To quote the premier's election night victory speech, it's "about doing what's right, not what's popular".  



1: V/Line 'rail fail' risk if fares cut before service boosted

The 2022 election campaign featured a 'race to the bottom' in public transport with parties trying to outdo each other with cheap fare bribes that cost far more than was ever promised in (more beneficial) service improvements. 

The Coalition's $2 daily fare was most egregious with this starving the system of revenue if it ever got implemented. Greens had their own crazy scheme while the Socialists wanted to scrap fares entirely. Labor was more restrained, opting to slash regional fares only with a $9.20 daily cap from March 2023.  It also promised some worthwhile weekend V/Line train service increases, mostly starting in 2025.  

See the problem? There will be a two year period between when fares are cut and services are increased. And even when the boost does come the every 60 to every 40 minute increase for Melton (one of Melbourne's fastest growing corridors) is nothing to write home about. A period where trains run crush-loaded and even leave passengers behind is not conducive to network goodwill and sustained long-term patronage growth. 


Labor also risks setting up the conditions for a 'perfect storm' of V/Line rail fails if its rushed fare cuts are unbacked by increased capacity, service and reliability on key lines. 

Does this ring a bell? It should. The 2006 election campaign featured 20% V/Line and a metropolitan Zone 3 abolition fare cuts that were delivered in March 2007. With rising fuel prices and strong CBD employment these delivered a rail patronage surge. A fragile, under-prepared under-serviced network couldn't cope. People couldn't board trains and reliability plummeted. Discontent around this, especially on the Frankston line, helped vote the Brumby government out in 2010. 

This time those hardest hit will be in western growth areas like Wyndham Vale, Tarneit, Melton and Caroline Springs. Most swung against Labor in the recent state election. While Labor retained its seats this time, a series of service fails, a more tired government and a potentially revived opposition could make 2026's result closer.  

The government would be silly to ignore these risks. They are more likely than theoretical given that existing weekend V/Line trains to places like Melton and Wyndham Vale are already heavily used as below. 



Recommendation: Labor should defer its V/Line fare cuts until extra capacity and frequency can be added on stressed lines such as Geelong and Melton, especially on weekends. It should also expand on its underbaked 60 to 40 min proposal to deliver 20 minute weekend services to Melton. Any political hit of such a deferral won't be as bad as news pictures of crushed trains and overflowing platforms.  


2. Metro train crowding as off-peak service lags

Travel patterns have changed post-COVID. The CBD has become more a place to play than to work, with many opting to work from home for at least some of the week. Peak trains on some lines remain very frequent but are now often quieter than off-peak, weekend and evening trains. However timetables have not yet substantially changed with typical 30 min evening waits between trains the worst service of any comparable developed world city. Crowding and long waits can discourage usage, weaken network connectivity and give rise to increased traffic congestion and parking pressures. 

Recommendation: Identify most pressing service gaps on rail network (eg 30 - 40 min intervals) and seek to redistribute peak service to cut maximum waits to 20 min at important off-peak periods (eg weekday interpeak, mid-late evenings and Sunday mornings) on key lines currently without it. Consider as a temporary measure  (which could become permanent) with campaign to boost CBD visits in conjunction with the City of Melbourne. Step up Metro train driver recruiting and advance planning for simpler greenfields timetables with 20 min maximum waits and more 10 minute service. 


3. Bus service backlogs in high-needs areas

Labor kept seats but suffered large drops in primary votes in areas widely considered neglected with regards to government services (including buses). These same areas have strong patronage and social cases for improved bus services especially where they can be delivered with the existing fleet. Failure to act is contributing to peoples cost of living pressures, lessening access to jobs and reducing the pool of labour that employers have access to. Compared to the 2018 campaign political interest in buses increased in 2022 with the Coalition promising numerous specific bus service upgrades.    

Governments may be tempted to bring forward land release for housing but commensurate attention to the early delivery of services such as buses is not always given. The Growth Area Infrastructure Contribution process does not always work well with regards to the provision of bus services. Lack of attention here places thousands of Melburnians in areas without even a minimum level of public transport access, especially if estates are built 'leapfrog style' without local connecting roads that would facilitate direct and efficient bus routes. Flexible route buses are sometimes suggested but these often have poor passenger boardings per bus hour productivity metrics compared to fixed routes.   


The government has announced bus network reviews for Melbourne's north and north-east. However  it will be years before these translate to new services on the ground. In the meantime the DoT's currently limited internal capacity to more quickly roll out improved services needs to be strengthened. Opportunities exist for sooner timetable upgrades in high priority areas such as Tarneit, Craigieburn and Dandenong as smaller scale warm-up exercises to test streamlined DoT's processes ahead of wider use. 

Recommendation: If not already done, propose bus service upgrades for key routes in high need suburban areas in Melbourne's west, north and south-east. Seek funding in the 2023 budget and early delivery thereafter. Commence planning for 7 day service on all residential area bus routes and large-scale SmartBus upgrades to be funded in 2024 with implementation shortly after. 


4. Mounting tram delays and looming accessibility deadline  

Although Melbourne professes a love for trams they haven't had the same degree of investment that roads and rail have had. It's hard to remember when the tram network was last extended. But leaving that aside, their two greatest needs are separation and priority from cars (for improved speed and reliability) and better accessibility

Trams are a major supporter of activity in Melbourne's most economically productive areas. They also contribute to liveability and home creation including redevelopment of underused inner-suburban sites. Trams are performing at their best when they largely replace driving rather than walking or cycling trips. 

Other tram needs include timetables to better reflect all week travel trends, network reform in the CBD and short extensions in inner and middle areas to provide a more connected network. Consequences of a failure to act on these matters includes a clogged city and inner suburbs (since there's no room for new roads and tunnelling is expensive) and a further degradation in tram travel speeds and unnecessary fleet acquisition costs to maintain frequency (as trams are having to spend too much of their time stuck in traffic). 

Recommendations: Government provide and fund a tram network development plan focusing on improved separation, speed, accessibility and logical extensions. The Free Tram Zone should be abolished early this term, possibly as part of other fare reforms. As a benefit for retail businesses, street view-obscuring tram window wraps also need phasing out. Scrapping both would aid tram travel comfort, speed and accessibility. 


5. Falling V/Line service delivery 

V/Line now cancels twice the proportion of trains that Metro does. The rate of cancellations has been steadily deteriorating since 2016. Cancellations are now also worse than those of much-maligned trains in the UK. V/Line's problems start at the top with previous recent CEOs dogged by performance and/or integrity issues.  

A failure to electrify to areas like Wyndham Vale and Melton has meant that V/Line is as much an outer suburban rail operator as a regional one. While few regional travellers take trains frequently, outer suburbanites may take trains almost daily across the week. The effects of cancellations would thus affect more people more often. This could become a political issue for the government given a common view of neglect in services held by people in outer suburbs. The 2010 election result is a precedent for what could happen when the government loses control of rail service performance as it did about 15 years ago. 

Looking ahead to 2026, the heavily regionally-based Commonwealth Games will be held in this term. V/Line will need to be prepared to play its role in doing the transport heavy-lifting here (and not embarrass the state with unreliable services). 

Recommendation: Government does whatever required to extract better operational performance from V/Line with an ultimate target of reducing cancellations to 2002 levels.  


6. Increasing tolerance of cost inefficient projects

We have become too accepting of transport projects that are very expensive for the benefits they provide. Rising interest rates, increased material costs, skilled labour procurement difficulties and government budgetary pressures are all pointing to a harsher funding environment in the foreseeable future. It's increasingly important that what gets built is the best of the bunch as regards benefits versus cost. 

We can't afford to keep waving through low BCR freeways while ignoring high benefit active transport projects like paths and crossings. Neither should we accept space-inefficient train station parking expansion in dense inner areas on prime land with huge costs per spot and passenger gained. On the other hand initiatives like more station entrances increase station catchments with benefits for patronage and surrounding precinct development.  

Within public transport asset utilisation should be improved as too many of our buses and trains sit idle off-peak or at night when they could be carrying passengers. Where inefficient overlapping bus routes are a problem then the start of the term is the best time to simplify the network, even though slow Department of Transport processes might make this difficult. I discussed potential opportunities for network pruning just after the 2018 election. Some got done but most remain today. 

Tram and bus priority are also worthwhile due to their ability to allow a given section of road to efficiently carry more people. And, while currently 'flavour of the month', FlexiRide type bus services are inherently lower productivity than fixed routes so have more limited applicability than many people assume.   

Recommendations: More rigour when analysing and comparing projects. An overall transport plan as required by the Transport Integration Act and recommended by the Auditor-General. Encouraging better utilisation of public transport assets through network and timetable reform including 2021-style resource re-allocations where desirable. A funding stream for small service upgrades and better processes for faster delivery of simpler, mostly timetable-only changes.  


7. Falling fare compliance

The 2022 Network Revenue Protection Plan shows an alarming decline in the proportion of passengers paying their fare between 2019 and 2021. This is attributed to various factors including a changing passenger mix (basically fewer peak commuters, most of whom must pass through station fare barriers) and the removal of cash top-ups from buses. 

Buses, closely followed by V/Line, recorded the largest drops in fare compliance. Reduced fare compliance costs the system revenue and reduces the revenue gains of potential service improvements.  

Recommendation: Make it both easier and 'the done thing' for all passengers to pay for their trip. 


Conclusion

Cognisance of and action on these seven matters will make public transport services more useful for more people, start to address some of the network's long-term issues and improve the system's efficiency and cost-effectiveness. Hence they should be early priorities for the incoming government, with the most controversial done first. 

Similar looming matters no doubt exist with roads and planning. Issues here could include (i) high costs of mega road projects and acknowledgement of their harm to sustainable development patterns, (ii) a road maintenance backlog (partly caused by more and heavier vehicular traffic including freight), (iii) the need for parking and road space pricing for revenue as cars electrify, (iv) underprovision of space for active and public transport, (v) a need to reverse the trend to bigger and heavier cars for safety and other reasons, (vi) urban consolidation to provide more affordable 'gentle density' housing in well serviced middle suburbs, (vii) more walkable outer suburbs with more services nearby and several more.  

Thoughts on these (and any more) are appreciated and can be left below. 

No comments: