Who lobbies for whom?

If you win a big public transport operating contract in modern Victoria you've got it made.

A prestigious client with a great credit rating, little commercial risk and billions in revenue over the multi-year life of the contract. You have to be pretty greedy, stupid or negligent to stuff it up.

Even then about the worst that normally happens is non-renewal. Sure, franchise agreements do have penalty, call in and early termination provisions but Victoria's Department of Transport (or equivalent) as contract owner is apparently pretty forgiving nowadays .

Arguably it's hard for them to be otherwise when (a) it's the government's own construction agenda that forces some lines to be more replacement buses than trains and (b) there hasn't been much progress on  factors, such as a lack of priority, that cause trams and buses to get stuck in traffic and run late through no fault of the operator. 

The train and tram franchises have always been big. More recently the bus ones have become so. The new ZEB bus contracts finally realise the 'Grow or Go' dream of 1980s transport bureaucrats. That is buses are run by five or six big operators with small family companies basically squeezed out. If you wish to enter the industry you basically now have to get a job with a big, often multinational, operator rather than buy a small company's routes and try to expand from there.  

The state government is a monopsony buyer of public transport services. Given their size and duration, the stakes are high if you are a current operator wishing to get a contract extension or an aspirant wishing to set up in Victoria.

There is a whole bidding and lobbying industry around winning and keeping public transport contracts. The next franchise to come up is the biggest of the lot - the right to run Melbourne's Metro trains (Metro being a brand name owned by the State Government). 

This is known as MR5 (Metropolitan Rail Franchising 5). This will be the fifth iteration of public transport franchising with themes explained here. There was already an MR5 for trams (with KDR losing to Transdev) but MR5's start for trains was delayed to enable a smooth start to Metro Tunnel operations under the current operator MTM. 

Though union and Labor party members back increased scrutiny of franchises and a reversion to public operation, all indications so far are that MR5 refranchising will proceed as envisaged. Indeed  just yesterday DTP advertised for an MR5 Transition Officer. 

Incumbent and would-be rail operators are sharpening their knives and pencils right now too.

How do we know? A company wishing to bid to run our trains will be setting up an office and wanting to know the locals. They may poach senior staff from incumbent franchisees or DTP, the franchisor. It's a bit of a risk for them so their pay offer may need to be generous.

However the Silver Review threatens staff cuts across Victoria's government sector, including DTP. Things are already in a state of flux with some recent departures from DTP. So expect some former DTP people to to pop up working for or advising private operators. Indeed varied experience across both government and operators is highly valued when you examine the career paths of senior managers like Warwick Horsley and Alan Fedda. TfNSW has announced staff cuts, things are pretty crook in the UK and our big infrastructure pipeline is slowing so the transport labour market may weaken for a while (unless bosses want to drive buses on one-third pay).  

But back to MR5. As well as stationing would-be managers here, aspirant operators will have engaged government intelligence, advisory and lobbying outfits. Essentially they are buying local knowledge and connections given that the typical lobbying firm will be staffed by people who worked in media, a political party, ministerial or premiers office. A LinkedIn search of their profiles will prove interesting.

It's no surprise then that 2024-2025 has seen increased activity on the Victorian Lobbyists Register with regards to transport operators due to bus and then rail franchises coming up.  

To answer the question "Who lobbies for whom?", here's what I've been able to glean: 

* Anacta Strategies Has been engaged by Downer EDI Rail since March 2024. 

* Counsel House Keolis Downer has used their services since March 2025, although Keolis bought out Downer's share more recently. Keolis Downer won the tram franchise in 2009 (as MR3), retained it under MR4 but lost the MR5 franchise to Transdev. Also works with automotive bodies. 

* DH Consulting Has worked for ComfortDelGro Corporation (better known as CDC) since February 2025. CDC was a big winner from the Zero Emissions Bus franchise, gaining operation of buses in Melbourne's north to supplement its existing western Melbourne and regional city routes. CDC hopes to bid for MR5 through Melbourne One Rail, with this name added to the register in May 2025. 

* Fitzpatrick and Co A very new outfit with just one client, it has advised MTR Corporation since August 2025. MTR is the current operator of Metro Trains. Their main job will likely be to ensure that MTR retains the franchise under MR5.  

* John-Paul Blandthorn Has advised National Trunk Rail since February 2025. 

* Philip Reed Kinetic Group since November 2019. Kinetic is the long-term operator of SkyBus and won the franchise for Melbourne's busiest bus routes (including SmartBus orbitals) from Transdev in January 2022. More recently Kinetic gained some routes in this year's Zero Emissions Bus franchises. Has been engaged by CDC Victoria since December 2020. Also Conduent Transportation Solutions (the myki replacement people) since October 2021. Associated with The Agenda Group. 

* PRX Been doing Puffing Billy's political lobbying since June 2020. Puffing Billy is a major tourist attraction that sometimes gets government grants. Has  been engaged by Dysons, a major bus operator in Melbourne's north-east, since July 2025. Other transport-related clients also include the Victorian Transport Association and TWU Super. 

* RedBridge Group Kinetic group was added in August 2020 (see previously for more). Also Avalon Airport since September 2021. The Go Ahead Group was a previous client but the association ceased in June 2025. More on them below. 

* The Agenda Group Has a long list of clients including many local government groupings that advocate state and federal government on matters including transport. They have also been advising Pacific National since March 2024. Most notable for us though is Go-Ahead who were added in March 2025. Go-Ahead is an international rail operator who has recently opened an office in Melbourne, with MR5 their  likely first target. 

Are there any aspirant operators without lobbyists appointed? French operator RATP Dev recently advertised for a commercial manager in Melbourne so they could be one to keep an eye on. 

Any I've missed? If so, please leave them in the comments below. 

UPDATE: August 22, 2025 announcement on MR5 commencement for metropolitan trains.

TT 209: Brunswick's woeful Sunday bus service

A theme raised in the now 1521-day old Victoria's Bus Plan is the mismatch between service levels and a bus route's network role or patronage productivity (either existing or potential). 

While the state government (to its credit) has been funding growth area bus network additions (either through the budget or GAIC mechanisms) the more something looks likes reform the faster it will run away from it. Even if previously promised. Hence the apparent collapse of the northern and north-east area bus network review promised before the 2022 state election. And when asked about bus reform at PAEC the DTP secretary may present information that conveys an impression of greater activity than has actually occurred. 

On the positive side some needed upgrades to existing high patronage routes have occurred. Examples include the 905 and 907 in Doncaster (funded from cuts to some very quiet routes), 733 from Box Hill, 800 on Princes Hwy and the recent Werribee boosts involving 170, 180, 190 and especially 192. These typically work the existing fleet harder on the existing network with an emphasis on improved weekend service and longer hours.

Some more local routes have also gained Sunday service including 284, 285, 293, 612 and the to be implemented 536 in Glenroy.

Melbourne's high patronage / low service areas

If a bus route is busy on Saturday it almost certainly means it will be popular on Sunday. Therefore, as a minimum, all routes that are well used on Saturday should operate on Sunday. Below are the most productive 20 bus routes that lacked Sunday service in 2022. Four of these have since had Sunday service implemented or funded. 

Productivity numbers here are passenger boardings per live bus operating hour with the median being 13. Thus everything listed is an above average patronage performer. With the top ones like 800 and 506 being nearly three times busier.   

The high productivity/low service combination is not evenly distributed. Certain areas were more overlooked by past 7 day bus upgrade programs than others. 

Greater Dandenong features highly, especially in the top 10. And that's not including the weekday-only 802 which would probably feature if it ran Saturdays. Greater Dandenong is the sort of area whose people have a thirst for bus service. If you run a bus in people will use it in above average numbers, even if its route is convoluted like the 814. I discussed Dandenong in more detail here. 

If we're talking about just one suburb, Brunswick in Merri-bek is the next most prominent. The demographics are different to Dandenong but are still mixed. There are many renters, people without cars and others who would use public transport if it was better. The area is generously served with north-south train and tram lines but east-west transport is all bus. 

The map below shows Brunswick's bus 'black hole' on a Sunday. More than half the routes do not operate on a Sunday. It's not even a case of 'walking slightly further to a frequent route' as proponents of bus reform often like us to do. That's because there is no frequent Sunday bus route in Brunswick with even major routes like the 508 only every 40 minutes to timetables substantially unchanged in years. 
  

To get anything better you need to walk north to Bell Street Coburg. There you will find a cacophony of overlapping routes, with 903, the most frequent, being every 30 minutes on weekends. With a mix of 30, 40 and 80 minute frequencies on a corridor whose buses have only got more complex over time, you are likely to see two buses and then a long gap. This is because when Bell Street gets a new route (like the 903 orbital, 561 extension or 514 creation) the wider network is never reappraised to permit simpler and more frequent service for a given budget. 

The case for a Route 506 7 day upgrade

Moving back further south, the busiest Monday to Saturday only route is the 506. Not only in Brunswick but also all of Melbourne since the 800 got upgraded. 

This makes its case for a 7 day Route 506 upgrade very strong. Especially as other worthy but quieter routes  have got seven day upgrades. As well as new Sunday service Route 506 also needs operating hours extended to at least the 'minimum standard' of 9pm since the last Saturday bus departs Moonee Ponds at 6pm - still broad daylight in summer. 

Not only that but what is now the 506 used to run Sunday with a 15 minute frequency operating until midnight in 1955 according to gazetted timetables. This started at Balfe Cr Brunswick West as there was not then a direct road connection to Moonee Ponds.  

This 1960s-1970s era timetable did have the route starting at Moonee Ponds. By that time Sunday morning service had been added but Sunday afternoon frequency had been reduced to 25 minutes. Still that's more frequent than all but two bus routes in Melbourne's north on a Sunday (246 & 582 being the exceptions). 

The arrival of Saturday afternoon shopping in the late 1980s led to some bus routes gaining Saturday afternoon service. However this was typically less frequent than Saturday morning service. A couple of years later the savage private operator bus cuts of 1990-91 led to many routes losing much of their already sparse weekend service.

The 1990s parsimony continued after the change of government with the legalisation of Sunday shopping not coinciding with many additions of Sunday bus services. However some routes gained limited Sunday service in 2002.

The much larger Meeting Our Transport Challenges minimum standards program that delivered at least hourly seven day service until 9pm commenced in 2006, benefiting over 100 bus routes. An average of three routes were gaining Sunday service every month between March 2006 and November 2008 - a sustained rate subsequent governments have never approached. By 2010's end most suburbs had Sunday service on at least some routes with some also having orbital SmartBuses. Metropolitan bus patronage rose strongly during this period. However some strongly performing routes that should have been early inclusions, like the 506, 536, 800 and others around Dandenong never got upgrades during this busy period.   

The current Andrews/Allan government has been weaker on bus services than its Bracks/Brumby predecessor. Even though its plans for affordable well-located homes cannot work without good 7 day transport choices including upgraded buses in inner and middle ring suburbs like Brunswick.

The largely unfunded Bus Plan of 2021 has so far been no match for 2006's Meeting our Transport Challenges in its sheer rate of bus network upgrades.

However there are signs of renewed state interest in better 7 day buses with examples listed before. Such a credible program would need to include (a) large weekend and operating hours upgrades for key routes like the 508, (b) completed roll-out of 7 day service on buses without them, starting with those with high patronage or high needs catchments like the 506 and (c) other network reform as required.   

How could 506 bus be upgraded to 7 days?

Its high patronage productivity makes the 506 bus, along with several routes in Greater Dandenong, top priorities for the next round of 7 day upgrades. Opportunities for funding them can come from: 

(i) From internal economies, for instance by cutting service on poorly used or duplicative routes  
(ii) Externally, for instance from budget funding

Our DTP is slower than Perth's PTA at implementing cost-effective bus service network reform as established here. While changing, with new contract arrangements driving most small bus operators out, Melbourne still has a larger number of operators. This is an issue because bus operators vary greatly in their potential to find internal economies from timetable and network reform. And DTP finds it easier to do reforms within one operator's routes than changes that involve several.  

The 506 used to be operated by a small company that had just one other route (the 503 that also doesn't run Sunday). That has only a small opportunity for network reform. The 506 transferred to the much larger Dysons and, just recently, the even larger Kinetic.   

Dyson's bus network has been pretty much preserved in aspic despite many of its routes being indirect, overlapping others or poorly used. The reform story here is weak, even though the north and north-east (which includes many Dysons routes) was identified as a bus review priority area in 2022. The government was returned at that year's election and apparently forgot about its bus review promise. 

In contrast DTP has a pretty strong record of working with Kinetic (and before them Transdev) in implementing bus network reform going back to at least 2014. So maybe, just maybe, 506 has a stronger record of getting 7 day service under Kinetic if economies can be found. 

Failing that there is the potential for state budget funding, such as was provided to upgrade the 800. The 506 stacks up strongly given its extremely strong Saturday usage. As for that matter 508 boosts and a 503 upgrade as a package, though we're concentrating on the 506 here. 

Preparatory work is currently being done on the 2026 state budget. This makes now a good time to be advocating for a Route 506 7 day service upgrade to provide the better east-west transport that Brunswick, Moonee Ponds and Westgarth need.

The aim here is for this to be supported by DTP in their business case (which should be justifiable due to the strong patronage evidence) and then backed by government for funding. 

Sign the petition

A Legislative Council parliamentary petition has been established to get support for a 506 seven day upgrade with longer operating hours. The benefit of this petition is that it is tabled in parliament and the minister must respond. The more signatures from Victorian residents it has the more weight it will carry.  

View and sign the 506 bus epetition here: https://www.parliament.vic.gov.au/get-involved/petitions/more-services-for-bus-route-506/

Updates on the petition and the Route 506 campaign generally can be found on the 7 day 506 Facebook page. 

See other Timetable Tuesday items here

Should Melbourne ditch train and tram franchising?

Whether Melbourne's trains and trams are government or privately operated has long been controversial.

Ardent proponents of either exaggerate claims about the benefits of their proposal and the pitfalls of the opposite. Both are often wrong; examples of both good and bad operations exist for both private and government operation. In the 'real world' considerations other than operator ownership tend to be more important to whether the service provided is good and efficient. 

Last weekend's state Labor Conference had a motion from the ALP-affiliated Rail Tram and Bus Union that proposed a path to government operation for our trains and trams. It passed unanimously. 

The politics

The Labor government does not necessarily agree with or implement policy motions passed at the party's state conference. However this motion passing strengthens the hands of those who want franchising ditched. Also the government is facing a state election next year. 

Taking back train and tram operations, like reviving the SEC and working from home, is the sort of policy that both appeals to the party's base yet does not repel centrist swinging voters. Like these it's also bold enough to generate headlines and discussion. 

Opposition may be weak or easily countered with only an older minority of voters remembering the 1990 era industrial unrest that plagued our (then) publicly operated transport. And an appeal to the base would be particularly valuable right now to enthuse supporters to hand out and scrutineer given falling branch memberships (an issue across both major parties). 

If public operation can be established to not cost any more (a claim made by SA's electorally successful Labor government when it reversed rail privatisation) then reversing privatisation might, unlike other policies like schools and hospitals that do include spending, be sellable as being financially responsible while furthering 'Labor values'.

However there is potential tension as the RTBU will ultimately want more than a zero cost basically symbolic change. That is for state operation to come with leverage in the form of greater influence with management and more favourable conditions for its members.

Such increased influence may not always be consistent with what provides best value for passengers and taxpayers. NSW and Qld have potential examples including opposition to Sydney's very successful driverless metro and Brisbane's high rail staffing to passenger ratio. But as an efficient counter example, Perth's state-run trains have a much lower staff to passenger ratio than Brisbane's while operating twice as frequently, carrying more people and delivering the highest customer satisfaction. If we were to go for state operation then a condition of it should be to import Perth's methods rather than Brisbane's, even if it requires poaching their managers. 

Under government operation the life of a Labor transport minister may become harder, as demonstrated by the fast turnover of them during the Cain-Kirner era and more recent strikes on Sydney's rail network. Indeed, prior to Gladys Berejiklian in NSW and Jacinta Allan here, being a transport minister was almost a poisoned chalice for the leadership hopeful.

DTP, having got comfortable with private franchising, would likely prefer the minister to keep it; not least as franchising has spawned its own sub-industry of franchise management advisers, bureaucrats and bid-writers whose elite swap between operators and regulators. It may also prefer a buffer, such as a private operator, to keep its planning work separate from industrial considerations.  

Older party members will warmly welcome government operation as a winding back of 'Kennettism'. Younger members will value it as an example of Labor acting on something that neither the 'Greens Political Party' nor the Victorian Socialists cannot as neither is a party of government.

Amongst voters there is a soft cynicism towards privatisation which works in Labor's favour. However there is also a dislike of extreme union militancy and protests especially in more temperamentally conservative north-west, north-east and eastern suburbs with comfortably-off middle-aged demographics. That can work against Labor if it is seen as being weak in countering unrest or disruption to services.   

Weigh these up and ditching the private transport operators certainly wows the party and union faithful. Less so for the bureaucracy and minister. But if the politics is compelling enough then maybe it's something that a twelve year old government might consider to show it's still energetic and producing ideas.  

Policy pros and cons

Something might be good politics but it might not be good policy. So let's look at that in more detail. 

If the motion encourages the government to scrutinise the value for money we are getting from our private operator franchise agreements then it may have done some good. It may be that, especially given it's public money involved, too many things are 'commercial in confidence'. Someone needs to sit down to see how much service we're getting per dollar we're getting and how this compares across other cities. 

What we do know is that (through the fault of government, not the private franchisee) that Melbourne's asset utilisation on its metropolitan rail network is poor with only about half the lines only getting a frequent service a few hours a day with 20, 30, 40 and even 60 minute gaps at other times. This is increasingly out of kilter with modern travel patterns with greater evening and weekend activity. 

If savings are identified my first choice is that they get used to fix Melbourne's notoriously infrequent off-peak train timetables. Although you'd also be expecting the unions to push for their members to get this instead for example through increased staffing or pay.    

What are other pros and cons of private franchise versus government operation for our trains and trams? I sum them up in this video. 

To summarise, the bar to justify a change from the transport operation status quo on policy merit (as opposed to political feels) grounds is very high.

Unless either service quality or value for money is poor, changing from what you have currently (whether public or private operation) risks having so few benefits that it's not worth the trouble.

And there may be opportunity costs due to the process wasting everyone's time, 'crowding out' genuinely useful improvements that actually make a real difference to the passenger experience. 

For more background see my history of train and tram franchising. The continual (and wasteful) rebranding associated with early franchising can be read about here. 

Comments are welcome and can be left below. 

Public Transport to this weekend's Victorian Labor Conference

If you're a Labor Party hack, hopeful or has-been, there's no bigger weekend in the year than this.

Today, Saturday and Sunday hundreds of you will gather at Moonee Valley Racecourse for a weekend of  deliberations, deals and debates.  

Climbing careerists will be there for the schmoozing, seeking selfies with former and current premiers and sounding out preselectors for potential vacant 'safe' seats in 2026.

Otherwise forgotten 1970s and 1980s backbenchers will be catching up with old cronies, swapping stacks of factional war stories (no Bill Hartley mentions please!) or sharing the latest bereavement. 

The Coopers, Fishers, Milleners and Electroplaters Union will be seeking party resolutions on their industries' extreme state significance as evidence of their might within government to take back to members.  

School cleaners will seek more pay and transport unions will want trains back in public hands. If they are young, scheming delegates may be sussing-out numbers for future pre-selections. Or the more mature might prefer angling for a cruisy advisory board or super fund gig. 

Star ministers may publicly love the attention but will be privately relieved when it's over. To them conference success means nothing happening after rousing leader speeches. That is no passing of uneconomic or controversial left-field motions. Although if any do get passed then expectations of implementing them must be hosed down. 

Getting there and getting home

What is of interest here is how delegates can reach the venue from across Melbourne and across the state by public transport. Especially given that the conference spans both weekdays and weekends. 

I'm going to guess that a fair number will stick around well in to the evening with formal or informal stand-up socialising and strategising. Whether it's pub or parliament there's never enough seats for those you wish to please, no matter how big the house.

Well known events demonstrate that getting home is more important to get right than getting there. 

Drinking and driving is not advised lest that earns you tomorrow's front page. 

You don't want to become the Tim Smith of the party do you? 

And even if you don't crash, doing the Groth thing with a government car will just get you served with the Steve Herbert treatment, which, trust me, is not what you want in this stage of your career. There's always someone who knows, and, chances are, they are in your own party. 

A quiet Uber ride home is the safe 'faceless men' option. Maybe that's fine for a low profile MLC whose main needed skill is to raise their hand when requested. 

But it's the selfie on public transport that can really do wonders for your 'person of the people' image on your socials. As is needed to build the personal brand that signals that you are on the way to better. That you'll walk and wait in the cold also reassures your factional backers you have what it takes for survival in 2026. Hence this guide.  

PT in Moonee Ponds

Below is a rough map showing public transport routes near the conference venue at the racecourse. Buses stop outside, tram is a short walk with trains only slightly longer. 

First of all Friday (that is today). You're not going to have any problems getting there. The 59 tram from Elizabeth St is every few minutes. The 82 is an option if coming from Footscray. The buses are pretty good being every 15-20 minutes on main routes. Trains are every 20 minutes during the day (better in peaks) so do check the timetable if in a hurry. Maybe allow 15 minutes walk from the racecourse to the station. 

Some MPs get a one-seat ride from their office. Eg Ben Carroll can get the 59 tram, Katie Hall has the 404 bus, Melissa Horne the 472, Sheena Watt 504, Kat Theophanous the 508 and Kathleen Matthews-Ward the Craigieburn line train to name a few. Josh Bull can even take the fast 483 bus from Sunbury. But Danny Pearson is the luckiest, being walking distance. 

Getting home? Your options depend on how late you linger. Before 7pm everything's running. But much after then service really thins out. The 404 bus, quicker and more direct to Footscray than the 82 tram, runs its last trip at 7:20pm. The 506 right outside the venue drops off to every 40 minutes with last bus at 8:50pm. Unlike the lucky Frankston line the Craigieburn line falls back to a 30 minute frequency after 7:35pm from Moonee Ponds into the city. So plan carefully or just get the slower but closer and more frequent 59 tram. Most bus routes finish around 9pm. 

Small hours party animal raconteurs do have some ways out, it being a Friday when Night Network (a 2016 Labor creation) is running. Options here are Craigieburn trains every hour or the 959 bus (which sort of replicates the 59 tram).  

 
On Saturday all bus routes are running. Frequencies drop back a bit. Late stayers need to be particularly mindful of the 404 and 506 due to their early finishes  (7:20 and 6:00pm respectively). Trams are frequent during the day. The Craigieburn line will run every 20 minutes during the day, dropping to the usual 30 minutes at night. This compares to every 15 minutes for an equivalent line in Sydney. This should however be the last conference the 30 minute frequency applies as evening trains will go to every 20 minutes following a 2025 budget funding package for the Craigieburn and Upfield lines. 

Night Network will operate much as it does on Friday night though the Metro website advises of a short duration bus replacement during the very wee hours. 

Getting there on Sundays is where PT to Moonee Ponds really falls down. It's currently sparse with the Craigieburn line trains only every 40 minutes in the morning. That's especially a gamble if you're connecting from another train or bus (which is probably also only every 30 to 60 minutes). You might also want V/Line from Geelong or Melton to start earlier, depending on your planned arrival. 

As for the 59 tram, the Robert Risson terminus at the bottom end of Elizabeth St isn't the most salubrious place on a Sunday morning. Tram 59 leaves there every 30 minutes, later improving to every 20 and then every 12 minutes. For an arrival before 8am, even though broad daylight, you're in Night Network territory with the 959 bus from the city your choice for a continuous trip.  

Buses? The minister might well say that 'the time for bus is now' but current timetables at Moonee Ponds reflect a very distant yesteryear. Routes 404, 483 and 506 do not run at all on Sundays. Despite 506 being Melbourne's busiest bus without Sunday service and 404 being a potential direct link to Footscray via Kensington Banks. 

The main route 508 from Alphington and Brunswick has a 40 minute wait if you just miss one. That gets super crowded on weekends with its timetable unchanged for many many years. 472 is another with a stuck in the past timetable; whereas it runs every 15 minutes on weekdays it drops to an unmemorable every 50 minutes on Sundays. The first full length trip arrives Moonee Ponds at 9:50, making it unsuitable for those with early starts.  

Better conference connections next year?

The Craigieburn line will have been boosted with maximum waits dropped from 40 to 20 minutes by the time of next year's conference. That's a worthwhile improvement for evening and Sunday morning travellers. However it is short of the 10 minute daytime off-peak service as proposed in the 2016 Metro Tunnel business case and as justified by existing patronage. 

So far there's no word on bus and tram improvements. The most notable ones (which would be smart inclusions in the 2026 state budget) include: 

* 7 day service on Routes 404 and 506 with wider operating hours
* Route 508 weekend frequency boosted from 30-40 to 20 min with wider operating hours
* Tram 59 and 82 evening and Sunday morning frequencies boosted from 30 to 20 min

None of the above require additional rolling stock. They are also routes with high existing patronage and even stronger potential with better 7 day service. Plus they would benefit Moonee Ponds which has dense (and densifying) housing with disproportionately low PT frequency.  

With suitable action like the above maybe delegates at next year's state conference will be in a position to move a motion praising the state government for the significant public transport service upgrades implemented at Moonee Ponds?