Tuesday, April 21, 2026

TT 228: More Trains on 6 lines - Yesterday's pre-budget announcement


The premier has been making many budget-related public transport announcements lately. Saturday's was about PSOs, Sunday's about free travel and fare cuts, and today's announcing a new X'Trapolis order and frequency boosts for the hitherto neglected Burnley and Clifton Hill groups of lines (plus Shepparton). 

After so many years of concentrating on infrastructure construction and, more recently, various ways of cutting or removing fares, the state government's revived interest in service matters is both refreshing and necessary. 

This is on several grounds including changing travel patterns, the desirability of maximising gain from investments in infrastructure and making our housing activity centres work. More public transport service made sense even before the current fuel crisis. 

This government's record on regional rail infrastructure and service has been strong while on metropolitan rail it is unbalanced with infrastructure favoured over service rather than a reasonable balance between the two. 

Previous governments in Victoria have found themselves too often distracted by second-order issues such as franchising, branding and ticketing, leaving little time or energy for service fundamentals. Other cities like Sydney and Perth (though not Brisbane) have taken a more balanced view so have increased their public transport service levels more than Melbourne. So much so that there are times of day when parts of our rail network have less service today than they did 50 to 90 years ago. 

What got funded?

I'll just discuss the Metro upgrades here.

These measures chip away at 30 and 40 minute headways that still plague about half the Melbourne train network, decreasing maximum waits to 20 minutes, first train to last.

Lines that got (or will soon get) this treatment include:
* Frankston, Werribee and Williamstown in 2021
* Sunbury, Pakenham and Cranbourne when the Metro Tunnel opened in February 2026
* Craigieburn and Upfield with funding in the 2025 state budget and implementation in mid-2026

Apart from Sunday mornings on the Sandringham line, the big omissions from this list were all lines on the Clifton Hill and Burnley groups. That is the Mernda, Hurstbridge, Lilydale, Belgrave, Alamein and Glen Waverley lines. 

This left us with a haves and have nots rail network with 3:1 variations in frequency unlinked to patronage levels. For example busy stations like Box Hill had 30 minute gaps at times that other lines had 20 and even 10 minute intervals.

Rail (and bus) service levels outside peaks were limited typically not by infrastructure but political will. For a long time this government's priorities were elsewhere but that is now starting to change, with yesterday's announcement a prime example of real action on service frequency (sorry AC!). 

In a nutshell: 

* Clifton Hill group lines get weekend boosts to a 20 min maximum wait. 

* Burnley group lines get weeknight boosts to a 20 min maximum wait. 

There are no announced changes for weekdays on the Clifton Hill group or weekends on the Burnley group. This gives rise to some interesting quirks where times you least expect get the most service and vice versa, so keep reading. Everything here is my interpretation of the media release.  

Clifton Hill group (Mernda, Hurstbridge)

Click below for a clearer view. 

This change removes the dreaded 40 minute gaps between trains on Sunday mornings on all of the Mernda line and the bulk of the Hurstbridge line (as far as Eltham). This will leave Sandringham as the only Metro line that remains with a 40 minute Sunday morning frequency.

Probably the biggest benefit of this package is that weekend evening services get improved from 30 to 20 minutes. While not stated I'll guess that stations beyond Eltham will have their weekend evening service boosted from 60 to 40 minutes. 

Weeknights do not change on either line. Meaning that service on 51 of the 52 Friday nights of the year will actually be less frequent than service on a Sunday (including Christmas) night. The exception of course is Good Friday as a Sunday timetable will be in effect. 

People between the CBD and Clifton Hill will get a 10 minute frequent service similar to what the West Footscray - Dandenong portion of the Metro Tunnel lines get. But only on weekends and during the day on weekdays. On weeknights they will retain their 15 minute service as the 30 minute service levels for each line are not changing then. 

Case studies of typical stations

Clifton Hill

Weekend night services improve to an even every 10 min 
Sunday morning services improve to an even every 20 min
Weeknight service remains at every 15 min approx

Preston

Weekend night services improve from every 30 to every 20 min 
Sunday morning services improve from every 40 to every 20 min
Weeknight service remains at every 30 min

Ivanhoe

Weekend night services improve from every 30 to every 20 min 
Sunday morning services improve from every 40 to every 20 min
Weeknight service remans at every 20 - 30 min


Burnley group (Belgrave, Lilydale, Alamein, Glen Waverley)

Again mapped below. 



Unlike Clifton Hill, this is all about weeknights. Not weekdays, not weekends, just weeknights.

If you're coming from the city or trying to change from a Metro Tunnel train on a weeknight then you may well face a 29 minute wait if you just miss a train. That will be shortened to 19 minutes, which is a big difference.

It's even better if you are on the city side of Ringwood - then you will get a service every 10 minutes until last train, just like Dandenong does. Frankly I think the media release undersells some of the benefits. Eg the current Ringwood weeknight frequency is 30 minutes, not 15 minutes for the later part of the evening. Also if the media release is right about Ringwood's 10 minute service then it is very likely that trains will alternate between Belgrave and Lilydale, saving passengers travelling further the need to change trains. Whereas currently, due to the low city - Ringwood frequency, a one seat ride to Belgrave or Lilydale might require you to wait an extra half hour. 

The above are very worthwhile upgrades. Busy stations like Box Hill finally get a weeknight frequency that not just meets but surpasses what it had in 1939. And Ringwood's is much better than it was in 1976, reversing the 1978 cuts and then some.  

However this timetable again has oddities. For example you will have more frequent trains at Bayswater or Croydon at 11pm on a weeknight than you will at 11am. This is because this timetable leaves untouched the 30 minute weekday gaps that are the bane of all off-peak travellers east of Ringwood. Sunday mornings are similarly unresolved, with Box Hill and Ringwood's 30 minute gaps remaining, versus the 10 minute service that Dandenong enjoys at this time.  

Case studies of typical stations

Ashburton

Weeknight services improve from every 30 to every 20 min 
Weekend evening service remans at 30 min
Sunday morning service remains at 30 min

Glen Waverley

Weeknight services improve from every 30 to every 20 min 
Weekend evening service remans at 30 min
Sunday morning service remains at 30 min


Box Hill

Weeknight services improve from every 15-30 to every 10 min
Weekday daytime service remains at 15 min
Weekend daytime service remains at 10 min
Weekend evening service remains at 30 min
Sunday morning service remains at 30 min

Ringwood

Weeknight services improve from every 15-30 to every 10 min
Weekday daytime service remains at 15 min
Weekend daytime service remains at 10 min
Weekend evening service remains at 30 min
Sunday morning service remains at 30 min

Bayswater

Weeknight services improve from every 30 to every 20 min (with no more forced changes)
Weekday daytime service remains at 30 min
Weekend evening service remains at 30 min
Sunday morning service remains at 30 min

Croydon 

Weeknight services improve from every 30 to every 20 min (with no more forced changes)
Weekday daytime service remains at 30 min
Weekend evening service remains at 30 min
Sunday morning service remains at 30 min

The remaining gaps 

These upgrades go some way in removing removing the longest gaps between trains at certain times on the Clifton Hill and Burnley groups. This is an intelligent way to approach it as 30 and 40 minute waits are major pain points for passengers and are relatively cheap to fix. 

The government has said that these upgrades will be introduced (likely in stages) in late 2026/into 2027. Below is a map showing maximum waits on the network after then. 

Most notable is the near disappearance of 40 minute gaps, with Sandringham the last major hold-out on the Metro network. 30 minute gaps will remain common with the Clifton Hill and Burnley groups but will apply for reduced hours of the week (weeknights and weekends/interpeak weekdays respectively). 

Potential future upgrades

The budgeted timetable changes are very welcome. All could have been done at any time in the last 20-30 years but government priorities have typically been elsewhere in transport.

Now that they are underway (with 2026 being the best year in Metro rail service uplifts for many many years) they might as well keep them coming to fix the remaining oddities and long gaps that reduce network usability. 

While there have been exceptions (eg the network-wide Night Network), rail planners typically like to do upgrades in line groups. The packages below might be a reasonable way of staging work.  



Posted by at No comments:

Thursday, April 16, 2026

UN 229: State election transport asks - What councils want in 2026


With 2026 being a state election year, local governments around Melbourne are working out what to advocate for their areas. These inevitably include a large transport component, especially for growth area councils. 

Politically we are facing a long-term state government that is struggling in the opinion polls. It defined itself by its large projects but is now beset by the consequent debt. The opposition has had its own problems including party disunity to the point of legal action. Support for the established major parties is in long-term decline with the High Court striking down restrictions on smaller parties and independents to raise funds yesterday. And One Nation has emerged as a significant threat, with opinion poll numbers translating into actual support and even seats in the recent SA state election. 

I discussed local government advocacy in 2019 and again in 2022. Today I'm back to check how councils are going with their transport priorities for this election campaign.

Most councils have something out that's reasonably current (ie 2025-2026). However content with regards to public transport varies widely. Eg there might be very little of it, it might be low quality (eg advocacy for tried and now discredited FlexiRide services) or it may be vague. Councils may have published specifics in more detail some time ago but may not always have reaffirmed it in a recent document. 

Below is a council-by-council list of what I've been able to find as their advocacy priorities in 2026:   

Banyule


Adopted in 2025. Key requests include the promised but not proceeded with bus network review, an upgraded Watsonia Station and specific requests for improved bus routes, mostly serving the La Trobe University precinct. 

Bayside


Key requests include improved bus frequency, specifically a frequent shuttle between Sandringham and Southland. 

Boroondara

https://yoursay.boroondara.vic.gov.au/kew-kew-east-balwyn-north-bus-survey

Boroondara has no known advocacy plan but recently did the above survey to guide advocacy on buses. 

Brimbank

https://www.brimbank.vic.gov.au/media-release/brimbank-advocacy-priorities-2025-2027

Some high level priorities above, including the redeveloped Sunshine station. 

Cardinia

https://creating.cardinia.vic.gov.au/cardinia-calls/advocacy-agenda-2025-29

Advocates a public transport package including improved bus services. 

Casey 

https://conversations.casey.vic.gov.au/bettercasey/transport-and-roads

Casey's main public transport ask is the extension of the Cranbourne line to Clyde. There is also a comprehensive list of growth area coverage extensions and frequency improvements on routes 828 and 893. 

Darebin

https://www.darebin.vic.gov.au/About-council/Advocacy-and-projects/Advocating-for-all-of-our-community

Most recent advocacy appears to be 2022 - update needed. 

Frankston

https://www.frankston.vic.gov.au/Council/News-and-media/Latest-News/Media-Releases-2026/Putting-Frankston-City-First-ahead-of-state-election

Emphasis on sporting facilities, community services and shared user paths. Public transport advocacy not a priority. 

Glen Eira

https://www.gleneira.vic.gov.au/get-involved/election-advocacy

Separate documents by state seat. Generalities only on PT. More detail, including boosts for routes 630, 824 and 903 appear in their 2019 Public Transport Advocacy Plan. 

Greater Dandenong

https://www.greaterdandenong.vic.gov.au/advocacy

Main asks include a FlexiRide trial for Dandenong South, potentially useful routing of buses through Dandenong CBD and a diversion of the hourly Route 814 to Monash University Clayton. Some detailed work was done a few years ago with the Greater Dandenong Public Transport Advocacy Statement produced. Greater Dandenong is a member of the Eastern Transport Coalition.   

Hobsons Bay

https://www.hobsonsbay.vic.gov.au/Council/Advocacy-priorities/Connected-and-reliable-public-and-active-transport

Council advocates for 'connected and reliable public transport' but only in the most general terms. Hobsons Bay has previously advocated for Melbourne Metro 2 and, some time ago, set down its advocacy priorities including a train station at Altona North and a comprehensive western region bus network review. There is significant community campaigning for improved bus and train services in this part of Melbourne. 

Hume


Public Transport advocacy priorities include a redeveloped Broadmeadows Station, and, in conjunction with Northern Councils Alliance, Upfield line extension and electrification. 

Kingston


Like Casey, Kingston supports an upgraded Route 828 bus (every 20 min 7 days/week) with this as a key priority. Weekend frequency upgrades for buses 708 and 903 are major priorities. Longer term Kingston would like to see a Sandringham - Southland bus via Bay Rd (like Bayside Council supports), a Southland - Elsternwick Nepean Hwy route and a Boundary/Clayton Rd service to connect Mordialloc with Monash. 

Knox


Council has long advocated a tram extension to Knox City and rail to Rowville. Knox is an Eastern Transport Coalition member. 

Manningham

https://www.manningham.vic.gov.au/about-council/how-council-works/strategies-and-action-plans/advocacy

Manningham supports a high frequency busway from Mitcham to the CBD (907 alignment). They also want Doncaster to be included in the first stage of the Suburban Rail Loop. More detail is in their Transport Action Plan from 2021. Manningham is a member of the Eastern Transport Coalition. 

Maribyrnong


The construction of the long awaited transport interchange at Irving St Footscray is a major advocacy focus for this inner-west council. Maribyrnong also backs bus reform and Infrastructure Victoria's proposal for a bus rapid transit between Maribyrnong and Tarneit via Ashley St and Tottenham Station. A 57 tram extension, accessible stops along the 82 and a frequent Sunshine to Highpoint connection are also requested. 


Maroondah


No asks for public transport in the above. However Maroondah knows what needs to be done with a comprehensive transport strategy released last year (which I reviewed here). I was particularly impressed with their advocacy for 10 minute train frequencies to Ringwood and a Route 737 hours and frequency upgrade to SmartBus. Maroondah has withdrawn from the Eastern Transport Coalition. 

Melbourne 


Fishermans Bend is a priority for the City of Melbourne with them wanting frequent buses, tram connections and Melbourne Metro 2 connecting to the precinct. For other areas council support tram extensions to Arden via Arden St and West Melbourne via Spencer St. A completion date for airport rail is asked for. Electrification of buses and more of our trains is another priority. 

The city wants the free tram zone extended but says nothing about probably the most critical factor to get more people into the city for longer which is better train and tram frequency, especially evenings and weekend mornings. 

Melton


As one of Melbourne's fastest growing areas, Melton has been actively requesting more transport investments. The centrepiece of its public transport advocacy is an electrified Melton line and new stations at Mt Atkinson, Thornhill Park and Calder Park (on the Sunbury line). Council also supports expanded and reconfigured more direct bus routes operating at turn-up-and-go frequencies. 

Merri-bek


Along with other northern councils, Merri-bek advocates for an upgrade and extension for the Upfield line including electrification to Wallan. Better east-west bus connectivity, including Sunday and evening service, is another key request. Accessible stops on tram route 19 are also advocated. Merri-bek is a member of the Northern Councils Alliance. 

Mitchell

https://www.mitchellshire.vic.gov.au/council/advocacy/advocacy-priorities/developing-infrastructure-for-living

Of all the growth area councils, Mitchell Shire probably has the least transport infrastructure and services. Council hopes to change this with rail electrification to Wallan, a new Beveridge train station and an extension of the Upfield line to Craigieburn to add capacity in the north all advocated. Bus coverage and frequency is another ask. Mitchell Shire is a member of Northern Councils Alliance and Outer Melbourne 

Monash

https://www.monash.vic.gov.au/About-Us/Corporate-Strategies-Plans/Plans-and-Strategies/Monash-Advocacy-Projects

Monash is advocating for funding to redevelop the area around Oakleigh station. Monash is a member of the Eastern Transport Coalition. 

Moonee Valley 


No known recent advocacy strategy. Link above is for 2022's.  

Mornington Peninsula


Not only is there the state election but also the Nepean by-election on May 2. Key priorities for advocacy include Stony Point line electrification, Improved express buses to Frankston with a 15 minute frequency, longer FlexiRide hours and zero emissions buses. 

Nillumbik 


Council advocates a bus network review to improve access, especially in rural parts of the shire. Nillumbik is a member of the Northern Councils Alliance. 

Port Phillip


Advocacy statement proposes transport upgrades for Fishermans Bend, including Melbourne Metro 2, a tram connection and an upgrade to the 606 bus. Connectivity to the area from Anzac Station is a priority with the promised Park St tram link advocated as well as a bus connection to Fishermans Bend. For trams council wants 96 and 109 capacity improvements and an extension of Route 78 in to Port Phillip. 

Stonnington


Above links to a very detailed Transport Advocacy Plan but it is a few years old. It floats ideas for tram extensions for routes that stop just short of train stations, eg 3, 5 and 6. Turn up and go frequencies on all modes is supported. There is significant attention to buses too. Council priorities include an extension of bus route 734 to Caulfield station and an Elsternwick - Victoria Gardens bus (partially implemented when 603 was rerouted to Burnley). 

Whitehorse


Council advocates upgrades to the Box Hill Bus interchange, Laburnum station car park and accessibility for Route 75 tram stops. There is no advocacy for improved rail frequency or bus services. 

Whittlesea


Wollert rail by 2030 and improved buses are the major themes of Whittlesea's public transport asks. Rail would add four stations to the network including Epping Central. Bus priorities include improved services for Epping North and Wollert (some of which were funded in the 2025 state budget), better east-west connections with main routes running every 10 minutes and improved coverage in Donnybrook. Whittlesea is a member of the Northern Councils Alliance. 

Wyndham 


Wyndham's advocacy documents are above. There is a large number for various past elections and budget cycles. Nothing yet for this year's state election. 

Yarra 


City of Yarra's advocacy roadmap is above. It requests little specific in the transport area, though there is supports improved train and tram accessibility and the delivery of the North East Link bus way. 

Yarra Ranges 


Yarra Ranges would like to see a duplication of the Lilydale line and a new station at Cave Hill. Council also supports increased frequency and longer hours for both bus and train services. Expanded FlexiRides that also run on Sundays is also suggested. 


Council groupings

Some councils support collective bodies that aim to do region-wide advocacy. Examples include:  

Eastern Transport Coalition (east of Melbourne)

Greater South-East Melbourne (south east of Melbourne)

LeadWest (western Melbourne)

Metropolitan Transport Forum (the biggest with member councils across Melbourne)

Northern Councils Alliance (northern Melbourne)

Outer Melbourne Councils (outer Melbourne)

West of Melbourne Economic Development Alliance (western Melbourne)

In some cases councils might effectively outsource their transport advocacy to these grouping, choosing to do little themselves. However that may or may not be effective as they vary significantly in their activity. 

Given rate-capping, recent fuel price hikes and changing priorities, some councils are reappraising the value of paying into advocacy bodies with some suffering reduced membership. 

12 advocacy tips for councils

As you might have gathered, the quality of advocacy we have seen from councils has varied. Councils themselves have been under pressure, which might have affected their work. Many councillors and council officers read this blog, so with that in mind here are some advocacy tips to succeed in 2026:  

* Be sensitive to how long advocacy plans take. Councils sometimes find they need to publicly consult on advocacy and/or do market research. This can give legitimacy to what they advocate on (which is good). However public consultation takes extra time. That's fine if the work is done early enough but if not the timing can sabotage success. If time is short it might be better to get something out as soon as possible. 

* Get the timing right. Councils need to be very aware of the budget and political cycles, with the latter especially important in an election year. The budget processes take longer than most outsiders think. You want your ideas out while the department is framing its business case for the budget. Advocacy that is too late will be politely brushed off and just wastes everyone's time. In 2025/26 key dates were middle to late last year for the May 2026 state budget. Especially in an election year advocacy activity should continue up to and beyond the budget because even if an initiative does not get budget funding you want it to be picked up by at least one and preferably all parties in the subsequent election year.

* Tailor the size of your asks to the prevailing political and budgetary environment. There is always money for some new initiatives, even though the general feeling is that the 'government is broke'. Right now there is the competing pressures of a heavy debt burden and a long-term government, struggling in the polls, wishing to win votes. I suggest including both small and large initiatives in your advocacy, asking for a bit more than you might normally request in a non-election year. In the current political environment large multi-billion projects have the disadvantage of being indivisible (ie all or nothing) while something like bus upgrades can be scaled to available budgets. Effective advocacy  of sound initiatives effectively generates interest and wherewithal that was not understood to exist before so is well worth doing.  

* Advocate to the right part of government. DTP is very constrained in its ability to originate funding. Councils might meet with department officers but the latter are rarely in a position to commit to much; ministers' offices take a dim view of expectations being raised without authorisation or budget sign-off. Winning support at the political level, eg local MPs and the minister, is important as the latter do have more pull (although still not totally as there is still a matter of approval from Cabinet and treasury for major spending decisions). 

* Ask for specific things with a clear list. Some requests are too vague. Or they might ask for a review of bus routes. 2022-3 was a searing experience for councils in the northern suburbs. Councils thought they won a major bus network review only for the government to go back on its word after it had been comfortably re-elected. The lesson from that is never trust a vague promise of a review. Instead request specific measures and campaign on them hard. 

* Know and be reasonably consistent with departmental thinking if possible. While I might have been dismissive of the department's influence above, being cognisant of their thinking is still vital. This is because a minister will often run a proposal past the department for an expert opinion. At this point your idea is still fragile; you don't want it dealt a mortal blow by the department considering it stupid, impractical or low priority. Even though it came from a community campaign and was not in any of DTP's priority areas for bus reform, because the Route 800 was consistent with their bus plan philosophy of more frequent main road bus routes and was easy to implement, the advice to the minister was likely supportive (it just needed funding which eventually came). Advocating councils also need to be aware of changes in thinking. For example several councils are still advocating FlexiRide buses in 2025-26 even though this was an over-hyped 2022-era fad that is now rightly discredited due to poor reliability and productivity. 

* Appreciate what is easy and what is harder or more expensive to implement. Know what is and is not effective. Be able to sort the substance from the fluff. As an example off-peak, weekend and hours extensions on existing popular bus routes is low cost, high benefit and quick to do but aren't as visibly supported by some councils as they should be. Whereas complex bus network reform can take years and is easy to derail if controversial. It's OK to advocate those but include some short-term 'quick wins' too, otherwise you might end up with nothing.  

* Don't be scared of rail advocacy. Especially for off-peak services that are cheaper to add. Possibly because council transport officers are more likely to have a roads based background, rail can seem a foreign land. Some councils in areas that could benefit greater from higher rail frequencies might only advocate for improved buses. When in fact both are necessary to form a proper connected network useful all week. 

* Asking for a train or tram extension can sometimes be worthwhile. A strong enough campaign might convince government to give you improved buses. That might not have happened if you asked for the buses directly.  

* Be conscious of network synergies across council areas. Advocacy opportunities exist with adjoining councils along a railway line or major high performing bus route that deserves a service lift. Make use of any council grouping you're a member of. In cases I have seen councils may pay into these groupings but the advocacy priorities they have for your area are poor quality. Don't let this happen - this lets your side down and is poor value for ratepayers. 

* Seek alliances with third parties in your advocacy. The government system is like an acupuncture patient in that it can respond to pressure, but not in all places.  Others, such as business groups and community advocates, can needle decision-makers in places that are less easy for local councils to do. Similar messages from multiple directions increases the chance of government taking up your advocacy priorities. This is because amount of correspondence and level of community interest are factors taken into account when the department and especially the minister are formulating priorities.   

* Get your transport advocacy asks in one simple document. And put a date on it to give assurance that it is current. Don't rely on a vague recent document and older detailed strategies (eg 'integrated transport plans') that people will struggle to find. Also include an easy call to action so that residents are encouraged to support advocacy priorities by contacting MPs. 

Conclusion

Especially in an election year, councils across Melbourne can play a helpful role in advocating for public transport improvement. Have a look at what your council is advocating. Get on to your mayor and councillors if you think they should be advocating things they aren't. 

Also if you see something significant that your council has started advocating on but isn't mentioned above, please let me know in the comments. 

Disclosure: I have advised or assisted some of the above councils in their advocacy. 


Posted by at 1 comment:

Tuesday, April 14, 2026

TT 227: Who is more reliable - V/Line or Metro?


Especially in the established suburbs that don't depend on it daily, V/Line has long had a better reputation than the metropolitan rail operator. Its trains are smoother, have nicer seats and are staffed with conductors. Some remember times (admittedly about 10-15 years ago) where V/Line trains were visibly better maintained than Metro's then dirty and graffitied fleet.  

The V/Line brand has endured for decades, with particularly high recognition in regional Victoria. No city bureaucrat dared touch it as they pointlessly rebranded metropolitan operations multiple times. As for privatisation, Labor quickly re-nationalised V/Line after the collapse of National Express while retaining private franchising for the metropolitan network. Thus people in the country (more inclined to support parties ideologically disposed to privatisation) got the public operator while those in Melbourne (whose inner north includes a cohort of anti-Labor green and socialist activists) got the private operator(s).   

What do the performance standards say?

V/Line's reliability target is that 96% of trains run and that 92% of services are on time. This is defined as being within 5:59 min for shorter distance services and 10:59 min for longer distance services. Metro has two sets of targets. That in the MR4 franchise is for a 98% delivery and a 90% punctuality (now defined as within 4:59 min). However Metro's Customer Compensation Code has a tougher 98.5% delivery and a 92% punctuality standard.

So despite the lore, V/Line's delivery and punctuality targets are looser than either of Metro's, both in relation to the percentages and the definition of on-time. Even though, as you'll see later, the basis for this may not be strong. 

What about actual performance, which is what really counts? Does this support or debunk the general perception of V/Line being better? And is reliability likely to be improved if outer suburban lines serving fringe areas like Melton, Wyndham Vale and Wallan ever got electrified? 

To find out I got 25 years of delivery and on-time performance from the PowerBI function on the public transport performance statistics website. 


Service delivery

First of all percent of scheduled trains delivered and cancelled. These are separate entries in both V/Line and Metro which I've tabulated below. 

The operator known as Metro (MTM) didn't start until 2009 but here I will use it as short-hand to refer to The Met, Bayside Trains, Hillside Trains and Connex that operated 2001-2009.  

For V/Line the cancellation percent is 100 minus the per cent delivered. For Metro it is around 0.3% less, especially in recent years. Both show excellent delivery until 2002 and a deterioration since.  


A rarely told story is these numbers is the widening divergence between V/Line and Metro. The relativities (ratio number above) are graphed below: 


The data has three phases. Roughly these can be divided as pre-Regional Fast Rail, post Regional Fast Rail and post Regional Rail Link. These were major projects intended to improve the capacity and reliability of rail services.

Before 2006 (about when Regional Fast Rail started) V/Line cancelled the same or a lower proportion of its trains relative to Metro. 

Then V/Line's cancellation rate steadily rose to around 20 - 50% higher than Metro's up to 2011. This was a time when both metropolitan and V/Line rail were under pressure. 

There was a faster rise after 2011 such that by 2016 V/Line was cancelling 3.2% of its services, or three times the proportion of trains that Metro was. This was contrary to the expectation that by providing alternative train paths, Regional Rail Link (which opened in mid-2015) would enable improved V/Line performance. V/Line CEO Theo Taifalos resigned in January 2016 with minister Jacinta Allan saying that the government had some concerns about the operational capacity within V/Line. 

The management turmoil did not stop there. October 2016 saw the appointment of James Pinder as V/Line CEO. Initially it seemed a good choice with cancellations down to 2.3% in 2017. But Pinder's luck didn't last. V/Line cancellations hit 3.8% (or four times that of Metro from which he came) in 2018. Even worse (for him) was being terminated and charged following corruption allegations as part of IBAC's Operation Esperance.   


What's happened since? Ignoring the pandemic and lockdown years of 2020 and 2021, V/Line's 2022 - 2025 cancellation rate has hovered around three times that of Metro and a similar percent to that which preceded Taifalos' departure and government concerns in 2016. As I noted in 2022, this government kept most of its 2014 promises on transport, but improving V/Line service delivery was not one of them.  

Punctuality

25 years of annual results are tabulated below (click on it for better view):   

Like service delivery, punctuality for both operators was good in the early 2000s. Metro were reliably over 95% while V/Line was a percent or two lower. 

V/Line's punctuality fell faster earlier from 2004 while Metro's fall was similarly large but a bit more gradual.

However V/Line did not share in Metro's punctuality rebound, with Metro's proportion of punctual trains often 5 to 8% higher than V/Line between 2012 and 2018. 

The difference narrowed during the pandemic but widened to the 5 to 6% range after 2023. Very roughly you are twice as likely to encounter a late train if catching V/Line than Metro. And this is even without factoring in the slacker V/Line standard (1 minute more for short trips, 6 minutes more for long trips). 

Conclusion

V/Line has had no discernible improvement on service delivery in the last decade. If you narrow your eyes and tilt your head you might discern some progress on punctuality but you need to be a good gymnast to say for sure. It can't be blamed on V/Line being a diesel operator with Metro being electric (except Stony Point) as the early 2000s numbers were good for both. 

This government has become more accepting of sustained low V/Line performance than the current premier was as minister in 2016. This has been a long-term weakening. Rail trouble-shooter Simon Lane noted that rail contract managers in the 1990s were tougher than they were in 2015, something that might have aided the good early 2000s results. 

Fairness requires acknowledgement that V/Line is carrying more passengers than ever before, with service growth far outstripping Metro. Credit should be given to the step-change in V/Line's operations unseen on any other regional railway in the country. Far more passengers are western and northern outer suburban, with Tarneit, V/Line's second busiest station, on a line that did not even exist 15 years ago. 

However V/Line's emergence as a major suburban operator reflects a reluctance to electrify outer suburban lines (eg Melton) that previous government may have done if faced with today's populations. Such delays in electrification have implications for carbon emissions, fossil fuel dependency and (apparently) operational performance.  

The paradox is that although V/Line operations have become much more Metro-like, with suburban-type frequencies to Melton and Geelong, V/Line's cancellation performance has gone from being better to three times worse than Metro in the last 25 years. 

It's fair for people to be asking why.

Especially those on lines like Melton and Wyndham Vale, who could now be enjoying two-thirds fewer cancellations had their lines been electrified and operated by Metro. 

See other Timetable Tuesday items here

Posted by at 2 comments:

Thursday, April 09, 2026

UN 228: Five tips to build a more fuel resilient transport network (and what the 2026 state budget should fund)

 

Three weeks ago I presented a modal shift pyramid to make our transport less dependent on imported fossil fuels, thus reducing pressure on critical industries (such as agriculture) where a fast switch is much less practical.

It included things like questioning whether a trip was necessary, considering whether it could grouped with other trips plus shifts from driving to active or public transport. Since then the state government announced a month's fare free public transport and the federal government announced fuel tax reductions.

The Labor-aligned Dunn Street Socially Democratic podcast recently interviewed economist Adam Triggs on Australia's economic challenges. It's a long but worthwhile listen (available below).   


A stand-out message for me was that no matter what happens we're likely to be stuck with high fuel prices for a while yet. With the spectre of 1970s-style stagflation. So it makes sense to think about how we can best respond, including in transport policy. 

In this spirit I offer five tips to encourage a shift to less oil-intensive public and active transport. I'll translate them into policies, like next month's state budget could do well to fund, later. 

1. Electrification 

Melbourne is fortunate to have a large suburban electrified rail and tram network. Regional V/Line trains and a majority of suburban buses rely on diesel.

Increasing occupancy on all these can be a significant help. Signs are that the free travel month has done that (especially for V/Line) but from a fuel resilience point of view it is essential that most of this new demand comes from forgone car trips rather than mode shift from active transport or even new travel demand created. 

Our state government was wise to ignore Infrastructure Victoria's proposal to disintegrate fares to make bus travel cheaper than trains or trams. That could have shifted passengers from electric to (mostly) diesel transport, reduced passenger/driver ratios, made bus network reform harder than it already is, and very relevant today, made public transport more diesel dependent than it should be. 

But it could do more to encourage a shift to electrified PT, including measures like more frequent service on electrified modes like trains and trams and better use of electrified buses all week (ie unlike the electrified Ivanhoe bus depot where most routes don't even run Sundays). 

Longer term there is a need to electrify rail to our fast growing outer suburbs including Melton, Wyndham Vale, Wallan and a reinstated line to Clyde. 

2. Larger public transport vehicles

We need to run longer trains and get more articulated buses on popular routes. These reduce fuel used per passenger and address crowding issues. You always want some spare capacity as reliability suffers when this is maxed out and you cannot win more modal share from driving. 

3. Routes optimised for high occupancy 

This can include measures like improved directness, routes going to the right destinations and a better match between service levels and usage potential. 

The orbital SmartBus network, while a good concept at the time, is notorious for having sections that are excessively serviced relative to their patronage while other parts justify more frequency. Of even more interest for efficiency maximisers are the extent to which orbitals (especially 903 in the north and west) inefficiently overlap other routes, with uneven frequencies and long waits despite having a high number of buses per hour. An example of a corridor with high mode-shift potential is the Coburg - Northland - Heidelberg corridor with a concept described here. Millers Rd in Altona North is another example where route consolidation could provide a simpler more regular frequent service.   


In other cases the existing orbitals might be retained but could justify short workings to boost weekend frequency from 30 minutes to 15 minutes on their busiest portions. Examples could include 901, 902 and 903 around Dandenong, Springvale and Chadstone respectively. 

While the above was about buses there may be scope for optimisation for rail as well. A particularly critical eye should be cast over complex timetables with multiple stopping patterns such as operate to Geelong, Belgrave and Lilydale. 

4. Public transport frequency and hours

This is a case of building up public transport service to encourage mode shift to already popular routes and/or make service more available all week in underserved neighbourhoods with high cost of living pressures.  

5. A larger role for active transport 

Both for its own sake and as feeders to public transport. Infrastructure to avoid conflict with cars is key. Economical initiatives could include pop-up cycling lanes to encourage the large number of people who are 'interested but cautious' about cycling, especially women and families. The fast roll-out of zebra crossings, 'missing link' footpaths, tree planting for shade, signalisation of busy roundabouts and adjustment of traffic light cycles to give shorter waits for walkers are key parts of this mix. 


Priorities for the 2026 state budget

Service related

(a) Cut maximum waits on the entire Metro train network from 40-60 minutes to 20 minutes between at least 6am to midnight 7 days (possibly staged, starting with 7am - 10pm 7 days). Same for V/Line for Melton and Waurn Ponds. Progressively boost shoulder peaks on key lines such as to Craigieburn, Mernda, Werribee and Ringwood as part of a transition to an eventual 10 minute all day service. Simplify peak stopping patterns where possible.  

Starting with cutting the longest waits to 20 min first, priorities for the budget might include:

* Current 40 min gaps: Mernda, Hurstbridge and Sandringham (Sunday morning), Melton (weekends), Waurn Ponds (midday weekdays). 
* Current 30 min gaps: Belgrave and Lilydale (midday weekdays), Belgrave, Lilydale, Glen Waverley, Alamein (Sunday mornings), Mernda, Hurstbridge, Belgrave, Lilydale, Glen Waverley, Alamein (evenings).  

(b) Operating culture, maintenance and investment as necessary to reduce cancellations, boost punctuality and more consistently run longer trains (especially for V/Line which underperforms Metro). 

(c) Frequency upgrades on popular already direct bus routes to provide for a maximum 20 minute wait all week with service levels and operating hours similar to that recently implemented on key routes in Wyndham. Revive network reform (starting with tacking existing inefficient overlaps) to create more 10 minute frequent bus corridors such as identified on the Future Frequent Network.  

Example routes with good patronage potential worth upgrading in the 2026 state budget include the likes of: 150, 152, 160, 302/304, 390, 406, 408, 418, 420, 460, 472, 494, 495, 497, 508, 527, 529, 532, 533, 541, 561, 606, 623, 630, 670, 693, 708, 733, 737, 791, 811, 813, 824, 828, 833, 841, 850, 900, 901 (part), 902 (part), 903 (part), 926 and more. This is cheaper than it looks as over half already run every 20 min or better on weekdays and may just need some minor operating hours and weekend additions.  

(d) 7 day upgrades and longer operating hours on 20 to 30 popular bus routes in high needs but currently underserved areas. These would deliver cost-effective upgrades across Melbourne including suburbs like Laverton, Altona, Brooklyn, Footscray, Kensington, Ascot Vale, Broadmeadows, Campbellfield, Essendon, Coburg, Coburg North, Brunswick, Thomastown, Lalor, Springvale, Mulgrave, Noble Park North, Dandenong, Dandenong North, Doveton and Frankston.

Example 7 day upgrades worth funding in 2026 include: 237, 281, 404, 414, 431, 468, 503, 506, 526, 538, 542 (full route), 549, 559, 675, 680, 772, 787, 802, 804, 814, 844, 857, 885 and more.  

Some are already the subject of existing and potential local community campaigns.

Infrastructure related 

(a) Rail electrification to our fast growing outer suburbs including Melton, Wyndham Vale, Wallan and a reinstated line to Clyde. 

(b) Bus priority to speed bus travel on key routes. Get more articulated buses for busy routes. 

(c) Accelerated roll-out of active transport upgrades, noting the recently released Active Transport Plan. Priority should be on large numbers of low cost projects rolled out quickly, with faster approval by DTP of council initiatives in this area. Large roundabouts have similar effects for walkers as rail level crossings do for car drivers so their removal should be treated equally seriously with a large program established. 

See other Useful Network items

Posted by at 1 comment:

Wednesday, April 08, 2026

Update: Melbourne Bus Advocacy Mentorships

There has been interest in the Melbourne Bus Advocacy Mentorships announced last week. However  some are still available. 


Detailed description here, including routes covered. 

If you have any queries, would like to know which are still available or would like to express an interest please email fix800bus@internode.on.net . 

Posted by at No comments:

Thursday, April 02, 2026

UN 227: Melbourne Bus Advocacy Mentorships now available


Would you like to get improved 7 day buses for your local area? 

You might have occasionally contacted a politician but nothing got done. 

Maybe you’ve almost given up. 

Well I have some news for you.

Today I'm proud to announce the availability of ten Bus Advocacy Mentorships across Melbourne. 

These are for people or groups wanting better buses in their area.

Why a Bus Advocacy Mentorship

With a template drawn from Dandenong’s successful Fix800Bus campaign, a mentorship will add energy to your advocacy, boosting its chance of success. 

Here’s four reasons why: 

• Timing. The mentorship is in 2026. A state election year here in Victoria where politicians and candidates will be most receptive to advocacy from people like yourself. Cost of living pressures and high fuel prices have increased the community’s appetite for better public transport. 

• Targeting. Mentorships are available for specific routes only. One route per mentorship. Yes it's strict but it also gives focus that maximises success. You can always move onto other routes after succeeding with the first. Each route is vetted for usage potential, social benefits and low cost of upgrading to maximise your campaign's success.     

• Experience. Your campaign will benefit from my experience – both on the government side as a bus planner and the community advocacy side.  

• Ongoing Support. Each mentorship will be for 2026 – basically between now and the state election. You will get an information pack to help start you off with facts about your bus route and advocacy approaches. And you’ll have someone at call who can give you tips and ideas during this time. 

A mentorship can be highly satisfying. You will meet people who share your passion for the power of improved public transport. You can make a real difference in your community. And if you succeed you can point to a boosted bus route or timetable and say "I made this happen".

The 2024 end of year video for #Fix800Bus shows what a successful bus campaign can look like.  


Who can apply?

All mentorships are for routes short enough for one person to effectively campaign on, though having two people is handy to share work. I’d also welcome interest from community, sporting, environmental, church or cultural groups wanting to take on bus advocacy as a project. Are you studying transport, urban planning or community engagement? If so a mentorship could be an interesting ‘extra curricular’ activity. 

You don’t need to live exactly on the route you’re advocating for. But it needs to be conveniently accessible as the best campaigning involves in-person and/or letterboxing activity. Also campaign posters, flyers and social media content require some computer and online skills. 

Everyone will do their campaign differently. But our experience is that the 4 Cs below are critical:    

• Community focus. You will never lose sight that the purpose of your campaign is to make peoples lives better through the success you obtain. More useful public transport meets a common good and helps people manage cost of living. Each mentorship is based on one service initiative that can make a big difference to people so is easy to communicate. 

• Concentration. As a campaigner you will be aware that there are many legitimate bus issues that need fixing. But, at least initially you will focus on the bus route in your mentorship. Success there gives confidence and you can then move on to advocate for other bus routes or even train services.       

• Cooperation. You will be operating in a diverse community. The passengers you'll be conversing with have many backgrounds and experiences. They will vary from wildly supportive to unengaged. As will the political candidates you'll be seeking to influence. You may have views on various matters not shared by everyone you talk to. But as a campaigner with a message you need a professional approach with all sides. The aim being to win support from all candidates and parties for at least the bus improvement in your mentorship and preferably others.    

• Commitment. Winners are people in for the long haul. Many campaigns might have a big splash, not get what they want and vanish. It may be hard getting traction initially but if you persist you signal to them that "you are not going away any time soon" which is incredibly powerful. Thus demonstrating that persistence by being visible to the public and the politicians you seek to influence is massively important.  

Maximising your success

Each mentorship is about getting improved 7 day service on one popular high needs bus route. As the same 'specific, high-benefit and affordable' formula that got the 800 bus upgraded, this has the maximum chance of success. Especially as government now knows the incredible patronage growth possible even just from modest upgrades to existing route and that it has an established capability to do it. 

Not having to buy new buses nor do public consultation (as timetable upgrades disadvantage no one) makes service upgrades more attractive to governments than more complex bus network reviews. You just need a strong enough campaign to to tap this goodwill and succeed, assisted by this being an election year and renewed interest in public transport due to high fuel prices. 


Available mentorships    

The ten available mentorships and details on each are below:

Advocacy Mentorship 1: Kensington/Ascot Vale

New Sunday service and longer operating hours on Route 404 between Footscray and Moonee Ponds












An upgrade arising from your advocacy would provide nearby 7 day public transport to a section of Kensington Banks without it. It would also cut travel time for those travelling between the major centres of Footscray and Moonee Ponds. It connects the Sunbury and Craigieburn lines, a connection that has been made more important since Sunbury trains were routed away from North Melbourne station. The patronage case for a Sunday service is strong as this route is Melbourne's 5th most productive route (measured on a Saturday) currently lacking 7 day service. 

Advocacy Mentorship 2: Essendon/Moonee Ponds/Ascot Vale
New Sunday service and longer operating hours on Route 468 between Essendon and Highpoint
The most direct bus connector between Highpoint Shopping Centre and the busy Craigieburn line, a seven day upgrade would connect people to shopping and jobs. As Melbourne's 9th most productive bus route without Sunday service this upgrade 'stacks up' on usage grounds. Route 468's high productivity,  low cost of service boosts and localised catchments all add to this mentorship's appeal.   

Advocacy Mentorship 3: Broadmeadows/Glenroy/Oak Park 
New Sunday service and longer hours on Route 542 between Broadmeadows and Oak Park
The only bus route in Melbourne's middle suburbs where one half operates seven days but the other half does not. A successful campaign would result in the entire Roxburgh Park to Oak Park route operating every day, better connecting people to stations at Broadmeadows, Glenroy and Oak Park. This upgrade has a good case on coverage grounds as much of its catchment is hilly and/or unserved by other routes.  

Advocacy Mentorship 4: Campbellfield
New Sunday service and longer operating hours on Route 538 between Broadmeadows and Campbellfield
Residential Campbellfield is a diverse, predominantly low income neighbourhood severed from surrounding suburbs by creeks and busy roads. It is served by two limited service bus routes operating 5 or 6 days per week over limited hours. Your successful campaign will get the 538 bus upgraded to run 7 days with longer hours, providing an all week connection to jobs, services, shops and trains at Broadmeadows. This route is quieter than some others here but this upgrade still has a solid case on social equity grounds and because it is cheap (due to the route being short). 

Advocacy Mentorship 5: Thomastown/Lalor
New Sunday service and longer operating hours on Route 559 between Thomastown and Lalor











A circular route connecting the eastern part of Lalor and Thomastown with Mernda line train stations and the busy Lalor shops that everyone loves. An upgraded service will improve access to local stations day and night. Has a good case on social equity and patronage grounds with this route the 14th busiest  (out of about 60) that does not run on Sundays. The route's shortness makes campaigning easier. 

Advocacy Mentorship 6: West Heidelberg/Bellfield
New Sunday service and longer operating hours on Route 549 between Northland and Ivanhoe
A handy connector to the Northland Shopping Centre whose popularity on Sunday guarantees strong patronage if Route 549 was also operated then. A seven day upgrade would also reduce social isolation exacerbated by Banyule Council closing the Olympic Leisure Centre pool in Heidelberg West. Those accepting this mentorship will have their case strengthened by the area's high social needs and strong Saturday usage of the route (8th most productive out of routes that do not run 7 days).   

Advocacy Mentorship 7: Box Hill North/Templestowe
New Sunday service and longer operating hours on Route 281 between Templestowe and Box Hill
Route 281's limited 6-day timetable does not reflect its popularity as an important north-south route linking major destinations at Box Hill, Box Hill hospitals, Doncaster and Templestowe Lower. It also has significant densifying residential catchment. These combine to make it Melbourne's second most productive Saturday bus route that does not run Sundays (important because routes that are busy on Saturdays are almost always busy on Sundays too). With other recently upgraded bus routes in Box Hill  recording good patronage growth, a good campaign assisted by this mentorship has an excellent chance of success, particularly in a state election year. 


Advocacy Mentorship 8: Mulgrave
New Sunday service and longer operating hours on Route 885 between Glen Waverley and Springvale
Route connects residential Mulgrave with major stations and shopping destinations at Springvale and Glen Waverley. As the third most productive Saturday bus route that does not run Sundays a local campaign can highlight the route's usage as a justification for a seven day upgrade. The area that would most benefit from improved services is around Wanda St, Mulgrave. 

Advocacy Mentorship 9: Doveton
New Sunday service and longer operating hours on Route 844 between Dandenong and Doveton
Route 844 is the nearest public transport for much of Doveton, connecting it with jobs, shopping, services and trains at Dandenong. It also serves the local swimming pool. Its timetable hasn't had a single trip added for decades with limited operating hours (including a 3pm Saturday finish). Doveton has high social needs with the lowest average incomes in Melbourne's south-east. This, the route's above average usage and the low cost of an upgrade, arms you as a campaigner strong evidence to justify a service upgrade. This mentorship would be in conjunction with Fix Dandy Buses, which has already done some campaigning in the Doveton area. 
 
Advocacy Mentorship 10: Frankston South 
New Sunday service with longer operating hours on Routes 772 between Frankston and Frankston South
Large parts of Frankston South have limited hours bus services with timetables unchanged for many decades on routes 772, 773 and 774. This mentorship is based on upgrading the 772 (as the widest coverage route of the three) to operate 7 days. This would assist access to Frankston station, jobs, shopping and services including the newly rebuilt Frankston Hospital.  

If you're not quite sure where each route goes or its service levels you can look these up at Transport Victoria timetables or Transport Victoria local area maps. 

Other routes?

What if you are keen on a bus route not listed here? Please send me a message to discuss prospects for it.

I have generally avoided routes covered by other campaigns such as Sustainable Cities in the west or various climate action groups in the north. I’d encourage you to volunteer directly with them if that’s where your routes of interest are. 

Mentorships are for upgrades to existing high potential but low service routes in established areas that can be upgraded by working the existing bus fleet harder. Other selection criteria include patronage potential, social need and a major self-evident service gap (eg short operating hours and lack of seven day service). I've also skewed the list towards short but relatively direct routes that are easy to campaign on and cheap to upgrade. 

Compared to simple operating hours upgrades to existing routes, new routes in growth areas cost more to provide and have longer lead times due to the need to buy buses. My experience has not been in advocating for such routes. Instead I suggest involvement in local residents associations or forums. As well as bus expansions such groups typically also advocate for trains, roads, schools and other services in their community. 

Where to from here?

Pick a mentorship opportunity you’re keen on, email me at fix800bus@internode.on.net and we can take it from there. Queries are also welcome if you are not ready to take on a mentorship just yet or need to know more first. 

See other Building Useful Network items here

Posted by at 5 comments:
Subscribe to: Comments (Atom)