Victoria's "big build" has blown out by another $11 billion over the past 12 months — and the Labor government is refusing to share details with voters, @keanebernard.bsky.social writes.
Comments
Log in with your Bluesky account to leave a comment
if it's ever built, and hopefully it won't be, and the cost is less than $300 billion due to routine blowouts of 20-30% and extensive delays, I'll be astonished. Same reason that Dutton's nuclear folly will run to half a trillion plus
Hi @keanebernard.bsky.social, you're right that any infrastructure project in Australia tends to blow out. And it's because Australia followed the US and UK neoliberal procurement model, rather than the less expensive model usdd by the likes of Italy, Sweden, Turkey, Korea, Chile, and Spain: (1/2)
3/3: You gave subjective commentary on SRL. Thankfully, decisions are usually made on stronger data and the actual cost benefit analysis found about 60-70c per dollar of benefit. I.e, it didn’t stack up.
SRL is a political project. It will likely be dropped soon for political reasons.
2/3: The methodology in the analysis outside the 5 core countries is pretty suspect. They had a theory and take it way too far. The Australian procurement experience is the opposite of what that report would have you believe (albeit this Lab Govt does like hiding the data).
1/3: You stated a causal link between overspend and “neoliberal procurement”. The report doesn’t find a causal link (try though it might) and doesn’t actually study Australia other than anecdotal interviews.
Even if that were right, the cost blowout point is a different one and moves contrary.
Comments
https://bsky.app/profile/ptua.org.au/post/3laznzcoo352u
I have to ask are you ok?
1) It finally provides a rail link to Monash Uni, Doncaster, and LaTrobe Uni.
2) It facilitates the growth of secondary CBDs in the suburbs
3) It creates a 2-seat journey between existing lines and new activity hubs. 2/2
The way to reduce car traffic isn't to build new roads, it's to create viable alternatives to driving.
In that time, they've massively under invested in rail.
And the net result is Melbourne's traffic is worse than ever.
And you then go on to praise SRL which by any sensible measure simply fails to deliver a rational case for its existence.
And I gave multiple specific reasons why SRL is likely to provide greater public benefit than something like Northeast Link.
On which points do you think I'm mistaken and why?
SRL is a political project. It will likely be dropped soon for political reasons.
Even if that were right, the cost blowout point is a different one and moves contrary.