UN 243: Simpler buses for Airport West and Melbourne Airport

Executive Summary: Potential exists to make better use of our existing buses to better connect Melbourne Airport to surrounding suburbs. A cost-effective example with improved airport connectivity for Sunbury, Airport West, Essendon and Moonee Ponds is presented here. 

Last week I covered improved access to Melbourne Airport, with an emphasis on what can be done in the short term. This is important as airport rail is years away and even if we had it tomorrow it wouldn't much improve connectivity from suburbs north and east of the airport. Or for airport workers who need regular fare transit options. 

Surrounding Melbourne Airport are residential and light industrial suburbs, largely built between between the 1960s and 1990s. They were then outer suburbs but would today be regarded as middle-distance. 

They are far enough from rail to make most of their populations dependent on buses as their nearest public transport but they are not so new as to get growth area funding. Thus their bus networks can sit unreformed for years, if not decades as priorities are always elsewhere and their turn never comes (at least without community campaigning - think 527 bus in Coburg North or 536 in Glenroy). 

Northern suburbs of this type include Dallas, Campbellfield, Coburg North, Glenroy, Keilor East and, today's topic, Airport West and Niddrie. Significantly both are sufficiently close to Melbourne Airport to deliver connectivity gains for it and as far north as Sunbury if local bus networks were improved. 

Airport West bus network concept

This doesn't claim to fix everything. But it seeks to simplify existing bus routes to deliver: 

* Simpler connection from the 59 tram to Melbourne Airport with longer hours, higher frequency and just one route number to remember from Airport West with a new Route 480 to replace existing 478 and 479

* Ten times the weekend service from Sunbury to Melbourne Airport with many more trips on the 480 compared to the current twice-daily 479. Longer operating hours too to benefit airport workers    

* One seat ride to Melbourne Airport from Essendon and Moonee Ponds with new 480 to replace part of 469

* Seven day Moonee Ponds to Sunbury service over longer hours with new 480 replacing existing 483

* Simplified Route 469 with a potential Highpoint extension to deliver seven day service to all bus stops in Avondale Heights by merging with existing limited service 407

Simplifying bus routes can be a swings and roundabouts affair with some worse off and some better off. Though the above is likely better off overall for most. 

Least controversial is likely the splitting of the 469 at Airport West. No one would ride it end to end as it is so indirect. The above concept leaves the Keilor East/Airport West half as the 469 (terminating at Westfield) while the Strathmore/Moonee Ponds portion becomes part of the new 480 (effectively an extended/merged Route 478/479).

The remaining Airport West - Milleara part of the 469 could be merged with another route to improve scheduling efficiency and/or connect to a stronger terminus. The obvious route to join it to is the 407 - a local Avondale Heights route to Highpoint that currently runs limited hours Monday to Saturday only. An extended 469 could operate between Airport West and Highpoint, creating a 7 day neighbourhood style route with stronger termini. 

The new 480 (which would be more frequent and run longer hours than the current 478/479) would provide one-seat access from Moonee Ponds and Essendon Station to Melbourne Airport, restoring a connection that was (infrequently) possible before 2014. As well access between Sunbury and Melbourne Airport would be much improved, especially on weekends. 

Then there's the Moonee Ponds/Essendon to Sunbury connection. This is currently possible on the 483 Monday to Saturday. It doesn't get very strong usage, at least outside school times. The new 480 would perform this role, but at a higher frequency and seven days per week. While the 480 does not operate through Niddrie, the 476, which will soon get a large improvement from every 40 to every 20 minutes on weekdays, does. And further north in Sunbury the 483's unique catchment reduced when the 475, which already runs every 20 minutes on weekdays, commenced.  

This leaves the area with two simplified routes to replace the 407, 478, 479 and potentially 483. 

* 469 Airport West - Milleara SC - Highpoint (after merger with 407)

* 480 Sunbury - Airport West - Moonee Ponds 

The 469 might take about 55 min end to end with the existing 40 min frequency retained. The 480 might take about 70 min for its full length. This makes a 40 minute frequency economical. Short workings between Melbourne Airport and Airport West would be desirable to provide a 20 min combined frequency on this portion. 

A number of service options are possible but it should be possible to do some reform with the existing  number of buses. Not all buses in the area are run by the same operator but there is precedent of multiple companies successfully operating key cross-regional routes such as occurs on the 900 between Caulfield and Rowville. 

Need for a simpler network

The Airport West/Niddrie area has Melbourne's usual fare of meandering bus routes running every 20 to 40 minutes until approximately 9pm. The most recent significant change was several years ago where the meandering 501 was replaced by the almost as perplexing route 469. This was also associated with the deletion of the also complex 475 and its replacement with a rerouted less direct 476.

The only semi-frequent route is the 477 which runs every 20 min on weekdays (though only every 40 min on weekends). This will be joined by the 476 which will be improved to a similar frequency following 2026 state budget funding. 

Key issues with the Airport West and Niddrie bus network include: 

* Limited operating hours (and in some cases no Sunday service) on routes 478, 479 and 483. 
* Limited connectivity north to Melbourne Airport and east-west eg Niddrie - Pascoe Vale
* Complex routes such as the indirect 469
* Weak termini affecting the 469 and in adjoining suburbs routes 406, 407, 465 and 467 also. 
* Inefficient overlaps and low productivity on some routes such as 469 and 483

Sunbury (which shares some routes with this network) is handicapped by: 

* Hourly Route 479 weekday frequency to Melbourne Airport does not mesh with local buses every 40 min and runs just two trips on weekends 
* Route 483 to Moonee Ponds runs hourly, has limited hours, lacks Sunday service but is also weak on unique coverage and productivity 

Many issues are visible on the local area maps for Moonee Valley and Hume. The network concept outlined before seeks to address most of these issues while being economical with bus usage. 

Scope for more

The above cut-price network does not address all concerns with the Airport West/Niddrie bus network. Moonee Ponds Creek, the Citylink freeway and bus operator history limit east-west connectivity. Routes such as 561 and 512 have weak western termini. Extending a route like 512 westward to Essendon North or Niddrie could provide some connectivity not well catered for by existing routes. 

Previously identified issues with the weak termini for routes like 406 and 465 remain in Keilor East. A local train station will provide a logical termination point but in the interim a case exists to extend these to stronger termini such as on the Sunbury line or even Melbourne Airport. 

Airport connectivity could also be improved if a Route 500 airport rail Sunshine - Keilor East - Melbourne Airport precursor bus route commences, with potential for this to extend to Broadmeadows and Doncaster to create a Suburban Rail Loop North precursor bus.  

Also, regardless of when Airport Rail starts, a North West Melbourne Bus Rapid Transit via Keilor East could connect many currently disconnected parts of Melbourne's north-west with each other and to western growth areas. 

See other Useful Network items

TT 237: 40 minute gaps gone from 5 lines - A look through Melbourne's August 2026 train timetables

 

Executive Summary: A worthwhile package of improvements that makes rail travel more useful for more trips. But despite political messaging about the dependence these have on large infrastructure projects, many could have been done years ago. 

The Melbourne suburban rail network will be almost free of 40 minute gaps between trains when a new timetable starts in less than two weeks. The timetable will slash maximum waits on five lines and upgrade peak capacity and service on others. Some V/Line corridors, including Seymour/Shepparton, Wyndham Vale/Geelong as well as South Gippsland coaches will also benefit. An unlikely line emerges as the biggest winner from the new timetable - keep reading to find out what it is! 

Metro service upgrades

Summarised in this animation below. 

You can click to stop it to read the fine print but there's a better summary here:  

Transport Victoria explains these changes here. These add 390 trips per week on the Metro network. This is an average of 56 more trips per day. Or a rise of 2.2% on Metro Trains' current 18000 trips per week master timetable.   

What does all this mean?

* The busy Craigieburn line gets 115 services per week added, with Sunday morning, evening and shoulder peak boosts, implementing 2025 State Budget funded upgrades. Before the increase it had gaps between trains of 40 min on Sunday morning and 30 minutes at night. However midday frequency remains at 20 minutes, well short of the 10 minute service proposed in the Metro Tunnel Business case. 

* The Upfield line gets similar evening and Sunday morning improvements to the Craigieburn line, amounting to 77 extra trips per week. Its peaks remain at every 16 minutes. The 2026 state budget funded a study of the line's duplication and extension to permit improved frequency. 

* Sandringham line is the biggest winner in this timetable change with three main improvements. These include cutting its 40 minute Sunday morning gaps to 20 minutes, improving weekday interpeak frequency from 15 to 10 minutes and through running it to Southern Cross, North Melbourne, Footscray, Newport and beyond. Through running will hopefully also mean nicer platforms at Flinders St with shorter walking distances. 

The government's release groups Werribee, Laverton, Williamstown and Sandringham as getting more than 180 extra services per week. Accidentally or otherwise, this grouping obscures the fact that the vast majority of the extra trips will be at the Sandringham (eastern) end, not the western (Werribee) end. 

* The Werribee line will gain some extra peak frequency plus resumed direct access to Richmond, South Yarra and beyond. Like Sandringham, this was funded in the 2025 State Budget. But unlike Sandringham these upgrades do not extend to a 10 minute off-peak weekday frequency. Like with the Metro Tunnel's West Footscray turnback, eastern sections of through lines tend to get the higher off-peak frequencies. 

The May 2025 announcement was 2 extra trains per hour in the morning and afternoon peaks, increasing service from every 10 to every 7.5 minutes on average. This is delivered for one hour in the mornings and one hour in the afternoons. A welcome early morning trip (which qualifies for free Early Bird travel) is added at 6:22am. However the new timetable does not fill the 24 minute gap after 7:46pm (caused by the weeknight transition from express to via Altona running). 

A summary of peak direction trips (times at Werribee) is below. The new timetable adds three morning trips and two afternoon trips, or 25 extra trips per week. 

Let's now talk about the cross city part of Sandringham - Werribee. 

Connecting Sandringham to the Werribee end partly restores the cross-city group that was served by the Frankston line prior to it returning to the City Loop when the Metro Tunnel started. The reason why I say partly is that whereas this group ran every 10 minutes every day when it ran from Frankston, weekend cross-city service from Sandringham will be only every 20 minutes. This low weekend frequency reduces direct access to the MCG from the west and makes the Metro Tunnel a net negative for South Yarra due to a reduced service.

Cross-city running is a good concept that works in other cities (and Melbourne prior to the City Loop). It was brought back about 15 years ago to optimise track use.  But we never quite perfected it with transposals, disruptions, shutdowns and conflicting passenger information common. Restoring reliable cross-city running is not just a timetable change but a cultural and operational one for DTP and Metro Trains. Ultimately it could become a second Metro line in the form of the Werribee Fast Rail concept I discussed here. 

* The Mernda line and most of the Hurstbridge line have their maximum waits reduced from 40 to 30 minutes due to Sunday mornings improving from every 40 to every 20 minutes. Along with the other lines' improvements these almost entirely remove the network's remaining 40 minute Sunday morning frequencies, at least after about 7:30 or 8am. The 30 minute maximum wait arises from evening timetables which remain half-hourly. Both weekend evening and Sunday morning uplifts for Mernda and Hurstbridge were funded in the 2026 state budget but they found a way to bring forward the latter (possibly as a pre-election sweetener). This needed just 8 extra weekly trips per line, indicating how cheap it is to remove irritants like infrequent Sunday morning service from timetables.  

Speaking of pre-election sweeteners, Ringwood (but not Belgrave or Lilydale) get one extra trip on Friday nights and another on Saturday, amounting to just two trips per week to busy stations that have not seen any service uplift for a decade.

This is embarrassing for a government that has done many disruptive level crossing removals in the area but not returned any favours in increased service. Unless they can cobble up a hasty timetable change in November, the 2026 Budget funding for additional weeknight services may have come through too late to help their electoral fortunes in the eastern suburbs.  

Source: Government media release & Transport Victoria timetables

It is worth noting that most of the above service increases could have been done at any time in the last few decades. That is they were not dependent on infrastructure, new trains or level crossing removals. Their timing was more likely a political choice, possibly to improve messaging about the benefits of major projects.  

Progress on keeping promises

Previous premier Jacinta Allan promised "A new timetable everywhere" for February 1 when in fact only the Metro Tunnel lines and Frankston got anything significant on that date. 

The 23 August 2026 timetable fully delivers on five lines and partly delivers on two more. 

The two part delivered lines and all four not delivered lines are likely to have new timetables, funded in the 2026 budget, in 2027. However even after that these six lines will remain with 30 minute maximum gaps at certain times (weeknights for the Clifton Hill group and interpeak weekdays/weekends for the Burnley group) as this year's budget did not include these. The same goes for Craigieburn and Upfield ten minute interpeak services. 

 

A silver linking has been better than expected progress on removing 40 minute gaps. Back in February it appeared that Sandringham would get 10 minute weekday interpeak frequencies but remain at every 40 minutes on Sunday mornings. Fortunately sense has prevailed and the timetable includes a boost to every 20 minutes. The same can be said for Mernda and Hurstbridge (to Eltham) that get Sunday morning frequency doubled only three months after the budget that funded them. 

Bus service changes

Some metropolitan bus routes get new timetables on 23 August. 

Route 561, a major route across the north serving La Trobe University, will get a major weeknight improvement to run every 20 minutes until late. 

Another major east-west route, the 390 from Craigieburn to Mernda, gets a Saturday evening lift from every 30 to every 20 minutes. This creates a case where service late on a Saturday evening (every 20 min) is twice as frequent as midday Saturdays where services remain every 40 minutes. Presumably this is to connect with evening trains at Craigieburn which get improved to every 20 min. 

Interestingly Craigieburn routes like 529 and 533 appear not to get similar upgrades with these remaining at every 30 min at night.  

513 and 514 get what appear to be minor tweaks, though these do not address other problems with their timetables. 

A significant number of regional city buses and coaches will get time changes to retain connections. 

V/Line service upgrades

The V/Line website explains their 23 August changes well. 

* Shepparton and Seymour are the big winners with some overdue upgrades. Shepparton improves to every 9 weekday services and 5 weekend services per day with trains replacing some coach trips. That's 48 extra trips per week on a historically underserved line.  

Seymour, which is increasingly a growth area line due to stations at locations like Donnybrook, gets an even hourly service on weekends with late finishes. Weekend trains will also stop at Craigieburn. However weeknight service gets less attention with large gaps remaining. 

* The Geelong line has 40 services per week extended to Waurn Ponds. This is a step forward. However it does not fully resolve the weekday / weekend differences at Waurn Ponds. That is Waurn Ponds enjoys a 20 minute weekend service but its weekday frequency remains at 40 minutes. 

In addition ten peak services will run to Wyndham Vale each week. The use of nine car (up from six car) should hopefully relieve crowding. These changes will come ahead of the opening of West Tarneit Station on Sunday 13 September. 

Some other V/Line times will change. Some peak Traralgon line trips will start/finish at Flinders St Station instead of Southern Cross. On the coach side there will be some additional South Gippsland services. 

Watch the video

Conclusion

These frequency upgrades are exactly the type that will make the Melbourne rail network more useful for diverse trips across the week, not just 9-5 weekday CBD commutes. They deliver 20 minute maximum waits for Craigieburn and Upfield while almost eliminating 40 minute Sunday morning gaps across the network. In addition Sandringham will join lines to Watergardens, Dandenong, Frankston, Newport and Clifton Hill in enjoying 10 minute off-peak weekday service.

To complete the job more upgrades like them are needed, not just those funded in the 2026 State Budget but also further improvements to cut maximum waits across the network to 20 minutes followed by a progressive roll-out of more ten minute service. 

See other Timetable Tuesday items here

UN 242: No passengers but more buses - How Western Sydney is trouncing Melbourne on airport PT

Executive Summary: Despite not yet serving passengers, the second airport in Australia's second biggest city has better public transport access than the main airport in Australia's biggest city. Described is a way to cost-effectively deliver the overdue better bus service Melbourne Airport workers and visitors deserve. 

Regardless of new premier Ben Carroll's enthusiasm for Airport Rail, its completion will be a long way off.

In the foreseeable future if we want better transport from surrounding suburbs (such as where many airport precinct workers live) buses must be much of the answer. I've written before about opportunities for better bus access to Melbourne Airport, including here, here, here, here and here. And credit/debit card tap and go, introduced last month, removes another barrier to using regular bus services.

How do does Melbourne Airport compare with other airports for public transport? 

There are various airports we could talk about but let's be easy on ourselves by setting the bar low.

It would almost be a given that a busy long-established airport would have better transport than a new one that hasn't started carrying passengers yet. Or is it? Keep reading!   

Western Sydney International Airport public transport

A new bus network for Western Sydney International Airport commenced on July 5, 2026 with more details here. This was ahead of its opening for cargo on July 27. Passenger service is planned to start on October 25. 

This network comprises five bus routes to four major termini surrounding Western Sydney International Airport (WSI). These termini are Mt Druitt (772), Kingswood (790), Liverpool (825), Campbelltown (845) and Liverpool via Leppington (860). 

All five routes run 6am to 10pm seven days per week with service every 30 minutes. This harmonises with trains (typically every 15 minutes from early morning to late at night). 

Melbourne Airport buses 

Four regular fare metropolitan bus routes operate to Melbourne Airport. These run to three destinations - Sunbury, Airport West and Frankston (let's call it Broadmeadows, though you might also wish to count Roxburgh Park and Epping). 

Unlike the Western Sydney examples, their hours and frequencies vary hugely. The Route 901 orbital offers the best service, with a 15 minute weekday daytime frequency and some Monday to Saturday trips after 10pm. 901's weekend service is similar to any of the Western Sydney routes with buses every 30 minutes. However the trains it intersects are typically every 20 minutes (and sometimes 30 or 40 minutes), making connections less consistent. Sydney upgraded its trains to a 15 minute maximum wait at most stations in 2017. 

The next best served corridor is the 478/479 pair to Airport West from where passengers can catch the 59 tram to Niddrie, Essendon and the city. The combined service here is 30 min weekdays and hourly weekends though operating hours are short. The 479 is an extended 478, operating to Sunbury every hour on weekdays, falling to just two trips on weekend days. Finally, the 482 can be disregarded as it's an occasional peak-only industrial route to Airport West. 

One recent improvement that has made travel from Melbourne Airport easier is the acceptance of credit and debit cards on public transport across the state. I highlighted the benefits for airport travellers last month. However Transport Victoria didn't get the memo with their airport travel page still claiming a Myki is required for travel on regular bus routes. 

Comparison

The graph below tells the story. 

The long-established Melbourne Airport (which passes 96000 passengers per day) has a far inferior bus network than an upstart Western Sydney airport that currently has no passengers. Not that passengers is the only metric when considering airport travel demand; workers due to their every day travel are also important (even if only a minority take the bus). This is something that Sydney understands but Melbourne does not despite customer parking charges being a major source of revenue for the latter. 

MEL's inferiority is due to both (a) a smaller number of routes and (b) a lower frequency on routes that do run, especially nights and weekends. The collapse in both is shown below.  

Whereas WSI's five routes provide a consistent half-hourly service all week from 6am to 10pm, the service offer to Melbourne Airport varies greatly. For example the 482 is an occasional peak only industrial route, the 478 runs hourly seven days while 479 to Sunbury is hourly on weekdays with a token two trips on weekends. 

MEL's strength is the 901 orbital's fifteen minute weekday frequency versus 30 minutes for all of WSI's routes. 901 also finishes a little later most nights of the week. But otherwise everything is in Western Sydney International's favour, whether it is geographic reach, stations connected, operating hours, frequency and service levels at surrounding train stations.

Melbourne Airport especially lacks direct public bus connections to western and northern suburbs such as Sunshine, Keilor, Caroline Springs, Greenvale and Craigieburn. And access to others where there is on-paper a bus, such as Airport West and Sunbury, is limited due to short hours and infrequent service. 

Six fixes for Melbourne Airport PT

The main airport for Australia's biggest city should have better regular bus services than the secondary airport for Australia's second largest city. That means longer hours. more frequency and more destinations. 

Here's six ways to achieve this: 

1. Establish a new regular fare bus route from Sunshine to Melbourne Airport similar to the Route 500 concept here. Noting that a premium fare express Skybus already exists this route would have intermediate stops at key employment locations with potential operation via East Keilor. A Sunshine - Melbourne Airport bus route features in Brimbank Council's 2025-27 Advocacy Plan. 

2. Swap Routes 901 and 902 at Broadmeadows so that 902 operates to Melbourne Airport and 901 to Airport West. Supported by the Northern Councils Alliance, this provides more direct access to middle-northern suburbs and train lines and be effectively a Suburban Rail Loop North precursor route. Desirable enhancements for both reformed routes (but especially 902) include adding Sunday evening service, boosting weekend service to every 20 min or better and potentially extending it to Sunshine to incorporate the above 500. 

3. Upgrade and simplify bus route 478/479. Operate all trips (including short-workings from Airport West to Melbourne Airport) as Route 479 so people have only one route number to remember and frequency is better communicated. Have a uniform weekday and weekend frequency for both Airport West and Sunbury. Increase operating hours and frequency and improve passenger information to boost currently low awareness of this service. A Route 479 upgrade is supported by the Northern Councils Alliance due to the high number of airport precinct workers who live in Sunbury. 

4. A new local bus route from Melbourne Airport to the Caroline Springs area via Keilor Plains Station. This would have both airport and non airport connectivity benefits including connecting Keilor to its nearest train station. This could potentially extend further west as part of a North West BRT.

5. Wider northern suburbs rail and bus service improvements including:
(a) Craigieburn line upgrade to every 10 minutes off-peak,
(b) Extension of evening and weekend morning trains that terminate at West Footscray to Watergardens to provide a consistent 10 minute all week day and night frequency, 
(c) upgrade Tram 59 evening and early Sunday morning frequency, 
(d) bus network reform in the Keilor East area to provide longer hours, higher frequencies and stronger termini for routes such as  406, 407, 465 and 469,
(e) 7 day upgrade and extension to Coburg for the 531 bus to improve connections at Campbellfield pending the construction of a rail station, with local advocacy here,
(f) simplification of Reservoir area bus routes 552 and 558 to enable easier access to the 902, and
(g) potential new bus route from Melbourne Airport via Mickleham Rd to Craigieburn. 

6. Wider northern suburbs rail infrastructure improvements including:
(a) Revamp of Broadmeadows Station to improve its amenity as an interchange, including for international/interstate visitors, as recently spoken about by Kathleen Matthews-Ward MP
(b)  and a new station at Campbellfield to interchange with Route 902, and 
(c) Upfield line duplication to enable a 10 minute all week frequency.
 
All six points have connectivity benefits wider than Melbourne Airport and would amount to a transformation of public transport in the north/north-west suburbs. 

Conclusion

Currently the secondary airport in Australia's second biggest city has better public transport access than the main airport in Australia's biggest city. Western Sydney also adds service before the airport becomes fully established to lock in travel habits early while Melbourne doesn't add service until decades later (if at all). 

The people who disproportionately bear the cost of this poor service are not airport travellers (who overwhelmingly only use the airport a few times a year and have a premium fare Skybus alternative) but airport workers, many of whom are not on particularly high incomes and live in surrounding suburbs.

Thus improved buses from Melbourne Airport is a bread-and-butter cost of living matter widening job opportunities and delivering real benefits to peoples' pockets. As distinct from Airport Rail whose direct network benefits, with the notable exception of a new station at Keilor East, are more symbolic and  harder to quantify.   

Cost-effective ways to provide better public transport to Melbourne Airport ahead of Airport Rail are outlined above. This would have benefits for visitors and (especially) airport precinct workers alike. They should be implemented as soon as possible given their relatively low cost, widespread benefits and ease of implementation. 

See other Useful Network items

New Public Transport Minister announced

 

New premier Ben Carroll is busy putting his stamp on the state Labor government he took the leadership of last week. After distancing himself from his predecessors ("I'm not Daniel Andrews. I'm not Jacinta Allan") his first action was to call a royal commission into construction industry corruption, something the previous premier refused to do. 

Mr Carroll has assembled his inner office and has started working outwards to the ministry and senior bureaucracy. An early sign of the finance people being back in charge was current DTF Secretary Chris Barrett moving across to head Premier and Cabinet. 

His new ministry is 2 people smaller than the one it replaced. And some portfolios have been removed. 

The new ministry

Appointed this morning. Colin Brooks (Bundoora MP) becomes Treasurer. Sonya Kilkenny loses Finance but keeps Planning and Attorney-General portfolios. 

Vicki Ward (Eltham MP) becomes the new Public Transport Minister after being responsible for Emergency Services. And Box Hill member Paul Hamer, who has an engineering background, picks up Roads and Road Safety. The new roles would be seen as promotions for both. 

Ms Ward replaces Gabrielle Williams who is elevated to become Deputy Premier and takes on Education. Mr Hamer replaces Ros Spence who gains Youth Justice and Corrections roles. 

Some titles have changed. Active Transport is dropped from a ministerial title. Transport Infrastructure and Suburban Rail Loop lose their separate ministerial roles. Though we have yet to see whether some of these get mentioned in Parliamentary Secretary titles. 

Broader context

In transport the capital intensive "it costs what it costs" Big Build Allanism appears to be winding down in favour of a financially tighter Bracks-like style. Of interest is that Transport Infrastructure and SRL do not feature in the new ministry as separate portfolio names.

Mr Carroll appears closer to Bracks than his immediate two predecessors and holds similar stricter attitudes with regards to budgets and borrowing. As a general guide, I get the sense that Steve Bracks would rather break a promise to save the budget whereas Daniel Andrews would rather break the budget to honour a promise. Much of this would have been a perceived need to build trust in Labor as responsible financial managers following the chaotic last few years of the Cain-Kirner government. 

Andrews famously said "We say what we do and do what we say". In 2022 I concluded there was a lot of truth in this based on 2014 promises. However Andrews was also not above raising and then dashing expectations when electoral opportunities beckoned, such as the pivot from the Western Rail Plan to SRL East, as documented by Kos Samaras here. While this delivered large victories in 2018 and 2022 it did not assist Labor's standing in the north and west, something that is high on Mr Carroll's agenda to restore.  

As for Steve Bracks, while he is universally loved across Labor, his government's record in metropolitan public transport was patchy with many 1999 transport promises broken, falling rail reliability, signing ill-advised myki and Southern Cross Station contracts and needless system rebranding. On the positive side there were restored and improved regional rail services and the biggest uplift in metropolitan bus services for at least 50 years. And under minister Peter Batchelor it made a hard decision on Eastlink tolling due to the need to rescue the collapsed metropolitan rail franchises signed by the previous government. 

Mr Carroll most differs from Bracks in the timing of when he became premier. Bracks came in as leader of a fresh, albeit minority, government that governed for over a decade. Mr Carroll comes in at what could be the end of a 12 year old government with an election just four months away.

Someone who is possibly a better parallel is WA's Carmen Lawrence. She was also the third premier in a long-term Labor government soured by corruption allegations. As well as coming to the role from the Education portfolio she also called a Royal Commission into what became known as 'WA Inc'. 


Challenges for the new minister

This is unlikely to be the season for future 'Big Build' projects, even though significant needs remain as Melbourne continues to grow. And there are pressures due to the government facing an election in less than four months. 

Instead emphasis is likely to be on making use of our existing assets and service improvements. This direction was to some extent set in the 2025 and 2026 State Budgets under previous minister Gabrielle Williams. But there's a huge backlog to catch up on given how much priorities were skewed against service for so long. 

I outlined some priorities for public transport under the Carroll government here.

Past blog posts on recent PT ministers 

The philosophy of 'Allanism'

Testing times for Minister Horne 

Challenges for Minister Carroll 

Welcoming Gabrielle Williams

[VIDEO] G Class Tram first day in service

This was yesterday 30 July 2026. 

Watch my video account of the first in-service trip from Essendon depot to the city below. 

 

UN 241: What might a 'new direction for government' look like in public transport?

 

On Tuesday, after the resignation of Jacinta Allan followed by a long Cabinet meeting, Ben Carroll emerged as Premier. Current transport minister Gabrielle Williams is his deputy. Election analyst Antony Green noted that that long-term three leader governments typically end in landslide victories for the opposition. However Jacinta Allan's polling as premier was so dire that even members of her own faction wanted a leadership change despite an election in just four months.  

Mr Carroll's first announcement was a royal commission into corruption in the construction industry, including major transport projects. The previous premier's resistance to that in the face of intense media and public interest was a major factor in her downfall. Integrity, community safety, economic management and restoring strained business confidence are other priorities of the new premier. 

The future of major projects

The government has budgetary issues too. It has to be selective with regards to what and how it builds. As well as potentially making unpopular revenue and fiscal decisions. 

Mr Carroll is widely regarded as being an internal critic of the Suburban Rail Loop but a supporter of Airport Rail. Especially after he got a Keilor East station added to the latter's plans to improve access to a poorly served part of his seat. My views on Airport Rail's comparative value here. 

As for the Suburban Rail Loop East, works are well under way, contracts signed and tunnelling about to begin. The Herald Sun has said the new premier will order a "sweeping review of the SRL" while The Age says he will "consider alterations". However Mr Carroll also said that he "was going to be a premier who doesn't break contracts". 

Transport policy under this government has been driven by Project 10000, a make-work scheme to create 10000 construction sector jobs through major projects, as opposed to the execution of a plan based on a careful assessment of needs. This was likely a reaction against the previous Coalition government that was widely seen as building little in its four years. 

 Back in 2020 I described this as 'Allanism', named after then then Transport Minister and later premier. This was a stance that emphasised 'Big Build' capital works over efficient asset utilisation and service provision (and for that matter a host of smaller high-BCR capital works projects). It is distinctively different to similar large transport construction agendas in Sydney and Perth as these cities also got large public transport service increases and some smaller projects like bus reform.  

The Carroll premiership will likely involve a policy reset. Indeed that's the expectation given the sudden leadership change after a period of internal dissatisfaction.  

The cavalier Andrews/Allan "things cost what they cost" attitude may give way to a more watchful stance. If for no other reason that the interest bill from project-based borrowing is cramping the state's ability to deliver services. That's not just in transport but also health, education and community services etc. On the other hand the government has an election to win so it needs to move fast, something not always conducive to good decision making. 

A pivot to reform, asset utilisation and service?

There are just sixteen weeks to go to the state election. There are even fewer weeks until 'caretaker period' starts. A government seeking a 'new direction' may wish to get as much advice as they can from their departments (noting the complication of some, including in the transport portfolio, going through the Silver staffing cuts). 

In some cases planning work might have already been done and merely require some dusting off to update it to current circumstances. Politicians can only juggle a few balls at once. Much work done by departments never gets implemented. Especially if they have had periods of being headed by people whose skill sets have been something other than winning support and selling ideas.  

It is also retrospectively clear that premier Andrews had no love for buses. As MP since 2002 he achieved nothing for Route 800 right past his office through the heart of the Mulgrave electorate, for example. This was even during the Bracks-Brumby era when thousands of extra services per week were being added on other routes.  

Jacinta Allan, his first transport minister, also turned out to lack interest in substantial metropolitan bus network reform, despite this being essential to get the most from buses in a budget constrained environment. Although some of that averseness to risk may be due to Labor's slim margin prior to the 2018 election. 

Regional trains and buses got upgrades but metropolitan trains and tram timetables largely did not with a planned 2015 greenfield Metro rail timetable not proceeding. Sydney meanwhile, under transport minister Berejiklian, was upgrading rail service levels  rapidly with maximum waits at most stations cut from 30 to 15 minutes in the new 2017 timetable.  

The next minister, Melissa Horne, was too inexperienced and not in the role long enough to significantly change the policy course for buses. 

Ben Carroll the minister after that, did want to reform buses, with Victoria's Bus Plan launched in June 2021. Things were initially promising but there were media reports that he was one of those ministers in Daniel Andrews' "freezer". Expectations were raised pre-2022 election only to be dashed after the election with regards to major publicly announced bus network reviews for Melbourne's north, north-east and Mildura. However some minor but worthwhile metropolitan rail frequency boosts on some lines happened in early 2021. 

The 2023 and 2024 state budgets saw little extra for bus and rail services though there has been acceleration of progress on both in the next two budgets under the next minister Gabrielle Williams. In terms of benefits versus cost there is little that is better value in public transport than continued train and bus service increases on main routes though more bravery on greenfield train timetables and bus network reform is needed to optimise 'bang for buck'.  

The 2025 and 2026 budget measures for metropolitan bus and train services were good for what they were. However they come following previous budgets which did very little for the service side (and for that matter some small scale but cost-effective capital works projects). So there's a huge backlog to catch up on. 

Seven new directions for public transport (that don't cost a fortune)

What could a "new direction for government" mean in the transport portfolio? Some possibilities here:

* A renewed emphasis on a large number of highly impactful walking and cycling improvements across the state. 

* 20 and then 10 minute maximum waits on increasing parts of the Metro Train network to give real meat to "Switching on the Big Build". Craigieburn line (very busy and near the premier's seat) followed by Ringwood (busy and marginal seats), Mernda (growth area line) and Werribee (growth area line) should be high priorities. Along with Wyndham Vale and Melton (weekends) service boosts for V/Line ahead of electrification. The 2025 and 2026 state budgets have already set the ball rolling here but much more is needed. 

* Regaining control of fare evasion, something that previous recent government have let get out of hand, especially for buses. Credit/debit card payment now possible on all buses make compliance easier. Another way to optimise ridership while protecting the system's revenue base is to move to more progressive fares across the staet, ie short trips are cheaper and long trips are dearer (though still very cheap). This could tie in to financial management and law and order agendas. 

* Revving up bus network reform. Though not necessarily as per the Bus Reform Implementation Approach. For example reform could be done by identifying major 10 and 20 minute frequency corridors and reforming surrounding routes to make this more economical. The more reform is done the more consistently frequent corridors you can have without buying more buses.

* Upgrades to existing direct bus routes. Most notably operating hours and weekend frequencies such as desirable for retail and hospitality workers. Again the 2025 and 2026 state budgets have made a start. High priority routes are listed here.

* Transport to Melbourne Airport is a renewed priority, especially for airport workers. Keilor East transport could be upgraded ahead of Airport Rail. Concepts for that here and here. 

 * Frequent SRL precursor orbital buses. Regardless of the outcome of any work to examine the Suburban Rail Loop, it is undeniable that high frequency orbital bus routes would be a high priority and a precursor to and subsequent feeder to the SRL. Examples could include (i) Sunshine - Melbourne Airport - Broadmeadows - Greensborough - Doncaster and (ii) Doncaster - Box Hill - Oakleigh - Southland - Sandringham. Early introduction of these could bring forward some of SRL's benefits. 

Such a major route along with a 'frequent network' for more main road bus routes, frequency boosts on key train lines and selected train and tram extensions and infrastructure improvements could well be the ingredients of adjusted transport priorities under a new premier.  

See other Useful Network items

TT 236: Bus Route 536 Glenroy - Gowrie first day of Sunday service

One of the many Melbourne bus routes that have been without Sunday service is the 536 between Glenroy and Gowrie. Linking the Craigieburn and Upfield lines it provides the only public transport for a large section of northern Glenroy that was once known as Gowrie Park. 

The area has social and public housing with significant numbers of people on low incomes. Route 536 has above average passenger boardings per hour. Similar to Route 800 it was a privately operated route whose services were greatly reduced in the early 1990s. These reductions included a removal of Sunday and/or after 7pm service on many bus routes.  

More information about the 536 bus here.

Many bus routes got extended operating hours during the MOTC bus upgrade program of 2006 but a significant number, including some popular routes, did not. Notable examples include the Route 800 in Dandenong and the 536 in Glenroy. 

Both routes had community campaigns advocating 7 day service. Route 800 was upgraded in 2024 with a strong increase in usage. Sunday 26 July 2026 was Route 536's turn. The new timetable features: 

* Extended operating hours including earlier morning starts, and evenings extended to about 11pm Monday to Saturday. 
* A new Sunday service with buses every 40 minutes to approximately 10pm. 
* A simplification of the route with the alternating Bourchier/Evell St part of the route standardised so that all trips operate via Evell St. 

There was also a change in the weekday midday frequency. Instead of a flat 30 minutes it went to an alternating 25/35 min pattern, presumably to optimise connections with trains every 20 minutes. The ideal of course would be a 20 min frequency, such as ran up to the early 1990s, to harmonise with trains (also every 20 minutes). 

The video below was from the first day of Sunday service on the 536. You'll see what's along the route and hear an interview with Kathleen Matthews-Ward MP on the difference the upgraded service will make and what's in store.

26/7/2026 was significant for other bus upgrades too. For example Route 511, an occasional service to the growth area of Beveridge, got service increased to every 40 minutes seven days.

Also introduced were two new routes - 405 between Brimbank Shopping Centre, Cairnlea and Deer Park and 451 between Cobblebank and Thornhill Park. Both are every 20 min on weekdays so now appear on my updated weekday public transport frequency map.

As well all buses were accepting credit/debit card payment, completing the metropolitan roll-out across train, tram and bus. This will make travel easier for non-regular passengers, including those who wish to go from Melbourne Airport to the city for under $3. 

See other Timetable Tuesday items here

Contactless Tap and Go across all buses starts today (with big benefits for airport travellers)

As noted last week, today marks the day that all bus routes in Melbourne will be accepting credit and debit card full fare payment. This adds buses to trains and trams that have already been transitioned over. 

The benefits for buses are particularly high. Myki worked well for regular train commuters. Every Metro station had a card vending and top up machine. Regular commuting was a frequent and habitual activity and the one-off $6 Myki card purchase cost was neither here nor there. 

Buses though were different. They attract a different mix of trips, including those that are not frequently made. People wishing to travel might not have a Myki card, and even if they did the ability to top up on a bus was removed during the pandemic and not reinstated since. So bus fare evasion went through the roof and the government appeared to both deny and do nothing about the problem. All while depressing bus usage amongst honest but occasional travellers who did not have a Myki. Trams had similar issues though they serve inner suburbs more likely to have a train station or Myki retail outlet nearby. 

All that is now a thing of the past with passengers how having a credit and debit card payment option for full fare passengers. Concession travel capability will happen later but even now they have the benefit of a payment option (even if full fare) if they leave their Myki at home. 

Getting to and especially from Melbourne Airport will be a major benefit of enabling contactless payment on buses. While the half price fares remain (for rest of 2026) it will be possible to get to the city for under $3 via a regular bus and train combination. It's slower than Skybus but the $23 saving might still make it an attractive option for some.

It's not very well marketed and the bus leaves from an interchange arriving passengers won't see unless they know where to go. This is why I was pleased to talk to the ABC's Charlie Pickering during the week to tell listeners about this cut price option that credit/debit card payment will make easier to use. 

For more detail, including where to find the interchange at Melbourne Airport, watch this one. 

Melbourne Airport to City for under $3!

Get from Melbourne Airport to the city for just $3 via a 15 minute bus ride that not even many locals know about! 

With tap and go credit/debit card payment enabled from today this bus-train option is easier than ever - no myki card required. 

Learn more in this interview with Charlie Pickering on ABC Radio.

Detail on the actual trip and finding the bus interchange here.

UN 240: The Suburban Rail Loop's Bus Problem

Executive summary: The state government risks setting the Suburban Rail Loop up to fail if it takes advice from a planning committee that has a poor understanding of the bus services needed to effectively get people to its stations. It should instead heed those with an understanding of multimodal public transport planning to be assured of maximising the patronage and mode shift benefits of the SRL.     

An expert committee set up to advise the Planning Minister on the Suburban Rail Loop and its precincts has published a series of reports on certain topics of importance to the role and success of the project.

SRL East Precincts Standing Advisory Committee 

Planning Minister Sonya Kilkenny referred several matters to the Suburban Rail Loop East Precincts Standing Advisory Committee (SRLEPSAC) in July 2025. 

One of those matters is mode shift. Which is effectively SRL's ability or otherwise to transform transport from being driving-dominated to a pattern that is more multi-modal with higher shares for public and active transport. 

The Committee includes one Lead Chair, nine (!) Deputy Chairs and fourteen other members. They are heavily drawn from urban planning and legal backgrounds with a few engineers thrown in. Many have worked for local government or as private consultants. However public transport operations or planning backgrounds appear rarer, something that may be influential as you'll see later.  

It has published nine reports so far. This includes overarching reports for (a) Summary and approach, (b) Common issues and (c) General matters plus specific reports for each of the six proposed SRL stations. 

These reports give an idea on official thinking and advice to the Planning Minister. So they need to be scrutinised for rigour and appropriateness, especially as their subject matter includes transport planning.

I'll review the General Matters report later after setting the scene. 

Transport and planning policy development

While by name a transport project the state government has stressed that the Suburban Rail Loop is as much if not more about planning and housing (relevant 25/7/2026 Age article here). 

Possibly because bringing in the planning dimension allows potential land use changes and value uplifts that (some hope) could part fund SRL through value capture. The housing element taps into current concerns about a tight and expensive rental market. And reframing SRL as a broader project subverts critics who regards it as poor value from a purely transport perspective. 

The recent megaproject era also coincides with some change in policy thinking. This is exemplified by the merging of the Planning and Transport departments (as DTP) and the preference for transport to be planned in a wider context. 

Hence specific rail, tram and bus plans have withered. They have struggled to attract substantial funding despite tens of billions going to stand-alone 'Big Build' infrastructure projects. There is also no overarching transport plan, something the Auditor-General noted as a Transport Integration Act requirement in 2021. Instead some transport themes (such as the publication of a map of strategic bus corridors) will be picked up in the broader Plan for Victoria.

If this approach drives DTP organisational structures, there is a chance that the staff resourcing for individual modal planning relative to broader precincts planning might change as the department faces pressure to deliver Silver Review cost savings.

If poorly done this poses risks including a loss of internal transport planning expertise and capacity to implement the greenfield rail timetables and bus network reform still needed to realise Big Build benefits. A DTP that is big but weak also risks it having insights that do not sufficiently flow to major projects such as the SRL.  

The Transport Integration Act 2010 is relevant here. Points that stand out include efficiency, seamless travel within and between modes, integrated decision making and the user experience. 

Inside the General Issues Report

Of most interest is SRLEPSAC's General Issues Report. Mode shift gets about 20 pages. 

I was particularly interested in what it said about access to stations (important if they are to get much use since there are only six on a 26km long line) and the role of various transport modes to enable this.

Bus services already good - no improvements needed?

The first mention of buses comes on page 15 of the General Issues report.   

In principle they like the early delivery of bus transport and infrastructure improvements. 

BUT

Without evidence the Committee asserts that "many of the precincts are already particularly well served by well-established bus networks".

Essentially they are saying is that buses around the SRL stations already pretty good. And that it's not worth investing more in them to deliver mode shift. So it was preferable to direct resources to active transport instead.  

There is no doubt active transport is important, should be improved and that its returns per dollar spent are high (likely more than the SRL itself). The same goes for bus reform. You'll get some benefits from an SRL without bus upgrades but they are limited. Add bus reform and the benefits multiply.

If you were given a choice of three projects (a) SRL only, (b) SRL plus bus reform or (c) bus reform only, no SRL then the case for the last two could be argued but there are no circumstances that an SRL only would represent good value. Essentially upgraded buses is a necessary condition for SRL to succeed with analysis by Mohan Wadia available here.

SRLEPSAC's view is basically the opposite. They don't see buses as an important part of the SRL project. Their comments about the areas around the SRL stations being "particularly well served" by buses are only tenable if they looked at a bus network map, counted the routes and were content at that. As opposed to examining matters such as route directness, operating hours, frequency and legibility to get a fairer assessment. 

If the learned planners who comprise SRLEPSAC did not deign to examine timetables for their widespread hour gaps or (horrors!) try riding some buses, they could have checked recent analysis from reputable sources for an informed view on the bus network.  

Indeed Victorian government agencies outside the SRL silo were continually churning out material indicating the need for improved bus services from 2021. Examples include:  

* 2021: Victoria's Bus Plan
* 2022 Announcement of major bus network reform (which in this form later got shelved)
* 2023 Infrastructure Victoria report on buses 
* 2024 Detailed bus network analysis by DTP and consultants with this tabled in Parliament 
* 2026 VAGO performance audit on bus planning

All revealed serious problems but also great opportunities for a revived bus network, many at low cost.  This is directly relevant to the SRL East because, with only 6 stations along its 26km length, many will need to rely on feeder transport such as buses to reach stations (remembering there will be no extra car parking and many live beyond both rail and convenient active transport reach of the SRL stations).

Potential for bus network patronage growth (which addresses both SRL station access and the mode shift question) was further expressed in a speech by then department Secretary Paul Younis who suggested that reformed buses across Melbourne had potential to carry as many people as trams. 

Real world evidence of such growth exists too. Route 800 Saturday usage rose 200% when its previously limited timetable was upgraded. And routes such as 733 and 767 (both of which serve SRL stations) had strong ridership increases when their services were modestly increased to 15-20 min on weekdays and 30-40 minutes on weekends in 2023. 

Additional rail (such as SRL) can increase rather than reduce bus trip making due to increased connection opportunities. This is demonstrated in cities such as London where, despite large Tube and Overground systems, bus ridership exceeds either individually. Versus the Melbourne case where, despite their much larger catchment area, bus ridership is lower than either trams or Metro trains. 

That the SRLEPSAC appeared so uninformed about the bus network and its potential for mode shift either indicates a lack of rigour leading to potentially poor advice to the minister. The result could be decisions (eg underprovisions for fast direct bus routes and poor interchanges) that result in the SRL failing to deliver its potential network benefits as part of the connected transport system envisaged in the Transport Integration Act. 

Bus infrastructure

The committee report considers bus infrastructure.

This could include matters such as bus stops being located as near as possible to SRL (and other) stations, sufficient capacity for expected service levels (even if not all provided immediately), convenient stop locations in the SRL area (noting that catchments can be 1.6km from stations) and, critically, provision for efficient through routes in multiple directions with strong bus priority.

The latter is extremely important and often overlooked; interchanges that require a bus to backtrack (eg Glen Waverley currently for key routes) waste thousands of hours that is better spent speeding travel and increasing service frequency. 

There is only one good answer to the last point about early delivery of bus infrastructure - yes! Because if it is not delivered first-up it never gets done. Which puts a permanent choke on the capacity and catchment of SRL stations and thus the SRL's usage and mode shift potential. Those wishing to take advantage of the SRL's activity centres to live a convenient low-car life are also affected if buses to surrounding local destinations are substandard.  

Bus infrastructure requires some idea of a future bus network to define some high capacity corridors. This part under 8.6.3 identifies work done. 

So far so good. Until we get to this, which immediately follows:

Mr Gnanakone is a professional traffic engineer and transport planner. Earlier he said that it was critical that active transport improvements be delivered early to achieve mode share targets. He was also supportive of early bus network improvements. However he warned that the timing for most bus improvement works was medium to long term, and even after SRL East was operational.

This should not be regarded as an inevitability; a benefit of buses is their ability to respond quickly and scale up to changing travel needs so it is purely a political choice that bus service upgrades and network reform have historically been so slow with multi-decade lags in some cases.  

Unfortunately the Committee does not take Mr Gnanakone's advice regarding the need for early delivery of bus upgrades on board. They are pretty soft, saying it is merely desirable rather than an essential of equal if not greater importance than the SRL itself. 

As noted before SRLEPSAC (wrongly in my view) thinks the existing bus network is fine and overlooks the need to make provision for the sort of fast and frequent bus networks SRL stations will need. 

I agree with Mr Gnanakone about timing of bus improvements. Buses should be upgraded as precursors to the SRL, not as something that *might* be done afterwards. Only this sequencing can bring forward SRL benefits early and maximise mode shift. 

Although opex-heavy bus is often pitted against capex-heavy rail in either/or debates, my more nuanced position is this: 

a. Bus reform on its own has big benefits and is cheap.  

b. New rail with bus reform has even bigger benefits but is dearer.  

c. New rail without bus reform is poor value for money.

There are thus no circumstances in which c makes sense, yet this is what seems to be recommended. The Committee's stance is a bit like skipping the main meal and going straight for the dessert; you're insufficiently nourished. 

Conclusion

It is concerning that the Suburban Rail Loop East has a committee of planning experts, intended to advise the minister on matters such as transport mode shift, that apparently: 

* Thinks that existing bus services are good enough ('particularly well-served' in their words)
* Has not considered others' analysis and policy eg DTP's Bus Plan, IV or VAGO reports
* Does not see buses as an essential means to get people to SRL stations or a contributor to mode shift
* Has rejected advice from transport professionals on the importance of bus access 

If this committee's advice on buses is followed then the SRL risks being a stand-alone project poorly connected to feeder transport that does not deliver anywhere near the patronage or mode shift possible if a more connected multimodal approach was taken. 

The Committee may well be good at town planning but for buses (and other SRL feeder modes) both the Planning and Transport ministers might do well to seek advice from elsewhere. 

As a reminder their General (and other) papers can be read here. 

See other Useful Network items