[U/C] M2 North-South Motorway

[Patrick_27]

A friend of mine is senior at one of the places talking to DPTI about this (though not personally on the project), I asked about tolls and they told me it wasn't going to happen at all - none of the toll companies are interested because there's far too little profit to be made due to both volume and usable sidestreets/alternatives, and the state government won't do it because they're not suicidal.

I switched off at DPTI. If ever an organisation is holding back the state, its this disfunctional depepartment.

So the DPTI are dysfunctional for saving Adelaideans a buck or ten when driving the major arterials? What are you a capitalist?

[claybro]

A friend of mine is senior at one of the places talking to DPTI about this (though not personally on the project), I asked about tolls and they told me it wasn't going to happen at all - none of the toll companies are interested because there's far too little profit to be made due to both volume and usable sidestreets/alternatives, and the state government won't do it because they're not suicidal.

I switched off at DPTI. If ever an organisation is holding back the state, its this disfunctional depepartment.

So the DPTI are dysfunctional for saving Adelaideans a buck or ten when driving the major arterials? What are you a capitalist?

Depends on if you would condsider Adelaides major arterials adequate, or if you operate in an industry that relies on fast efficient road transport. Thing is, most commercial operators don't see the current setup as "saving them money". They would happily pay the toll because time is money. And every set of lights wastes time, and fuel, and for that matter, creates more pollution. So no. The. current DPTI position on tolls is not necessarily saving people money.

[SBD]

I switched off at DPTI. If ever an organisation is holding back the state, its this disfunctional department.

So the DPTI are dysfunctional for saving Adelaideans a buck or ten when driving the major arterials? What are you a capitalist?

Depends on if you would condsider Adelaides major arterials adequate, or if you operate in an industry that relies on fast efficient road transport. Thing is, most commercial operators don't see the current setup as "saving them money". They would happily pay the toll because time is money. And every set of lights wastes time, and fuel, and for that matter, creates more pollution. So no. The. current DPTI position on tolls is not necessarily saving people money.

The statement about tolls didn't mention DPTI - it talked about toll road operators and government.

DPTI may not be perfect, but which major state government departments do you think have been more helpful over the last ten years? Health? Education? Energy and Mining? Child Protection? It seems to me that DPTI hasn't been doing too bad overall.

[muzzamo]

DPTI has had billions and billions of dollars in project money over the last 10 years. That money goes a long way towards papering over any inadequacies that the department may have. It would be interesting to see how well it operated in an environment where the project $ had dried up yet the dead wood, useless bureaucrats and hopeless inefficiency remained.

[how good is he]

Is the DTPI told what funding it gets/what projects are funded from InfrastructureSA (supposedly independent body) or from the Govt?

[Norman]

Is the DTPI told what funding it gets/what projects are funded from InfrastructureSA (supposedly independent body) or from the Govt?

Infrastructure SA makes recommendations to the government, which then allocates funding to different projects.

[mawsonguy]

DPTI has had billions and billions of dollars in project money over the last 10 years. That money goes a long way towards papering over any inadequacies that the department may have. It would be interesting to see how well it operated in an environment where the project $ had dried up yet the dead wood, useless bureaucrats and hopeless inefficiency remained.

I think that you're being a bit unkind. DPTI bought the T2T in with increased scope for the same budget and under time; the Superway on time and on budget; Darlington with increased scope for the same price; and the Northern Connector under budget. It doesn'tt have blowouts in its annual budget, unlike other departments. IIRC it has also bought in its train projects (e.g. Goodwood & Torrens junctions) on time and on budget. About the only stuff up has been the Tram extension due to lack of experience in that area and political medling. Still it wasn't as bad as the tram stuff ups in Sydney.

The problems are that it has no expertise in trams and it hasn't been funded to do continuous forward project planning. Rather, the politicains have forced it to adopt a stop start approach contingent on Federal funding.

[muzzamo]

Opinion piece in the tiser

Before the last state election almost a year ago, both Liberal and Labor pledged they would not introduce toll roads.

They were absolutely right. And absolutely wrong.

Politically they were right. Toll roads are a political tar baby, a three-lane highway to Opposition.

Any government that tried to introduce toll roads would face defeat at the next election.

So why were they wrong? Because toll roads would generate tens of millions of additional revenue dollars for the government of the day, enough to modernise and upgrade Adelaide’s clogged road network.

In the 2016-17 financial year motorists in Victoria paid $2.1 billion in toll road fees. Even if half of that was absorbed in profit for the operator and set up and operating costs, the Victorian Government has more than a $1 billion a year to pump into improving the state’s road network.

If toll roads were introduced in South Australia they would probably generate something like $250 million in additional government revenue each year. Of course, toll roads are unpopular with the people who are forced to use them.

But toll roads are a classic tax because only the user pays. Currently taxpayers in country areas, some of them remote from Adelaide, are paying for the upgrade of major roads — notably South Rd — in Adelaide.

Yet many people in those towns will never get to drive on them. They are contributing to a road they will never use.

Currently the State Government is looking at ways of investing perhaps $5 billion or more to upgrade South Rd, possibly with tunnels, between the River Torrens and Tonsley near Darlington.

Transport Minister Stephan Knoll said the dollar figure for the work would be huge and could eclipse the $5 billion already spent on completed upgrading. The ultimate aim is to have a traffic-light free drive from Gawler in the north to Old Noarlunga in the south.

But Mr Knoll ruled out any form of toll road to assist the financing of the project.

“We took to the election a pretty clear policy of not putting tolls on roads and we’re sticking to that,” he said.

Any variation from that rehearsed line and the Opposition would be ready to pounce. The current State Parliament is vastly different from the parliamentary chambers of recent years. There is a new Liberal Government, the first for 16 years, with a new Premier, Steven Marshall.

Labor in Opposition has a new leadership team under Peter Malinauskas.

Both are reasonable men. Could a way be forged for the two major parties to work in harness to introduce toll roads? Could it be done without one side taunting the other and trying to snare cheap votes on the back of a toll-road scare campaign?

If, as clearly occurs in the three states with toll roads — Victoria, NSW and Queensland — tolls can improve Adelaide’s road system, then why not attempt to introduce them in a calm, bipartisan way?

The two parties have no problem agreeing on increased pay or conditions for members. Why not work together on toll roads?

I’m the first to concede that the political system is too immature, timid and greedy for power to find common ground on toll roads. Any discussion, however well intentioned, would degenerate into a slanging match: “You said it first. It’s your idea.”

But the upgrade of Adelaide’s road network will drag on for years because of the shortage of funding. Toll roads provide at least part of the solution.

Better roads mean faster, cheaper freight delivery and a reduction in road accidents. Trades, sales and deliveries would be able to provide faster, more efficient services.

Of course, toll roads would not be popular and would hit certain sections of the community harder than others.

But rural districts receive little or no benefit from the present arrangements in which road upgrades in Adelaide are paid from general revenue everyone contributes to.

Toll roads should not be dismissed simply because our politicians are too frightened to open community debate.

[SRW]

I think the duplicated Southern Expressway should probably have had a toll because the primary benefit has been for southern suburbs commuters. But the economic argument for South Road proper is about free-moving freight and increasing productivity which benefits the entire state (and country) and should be funded accordingly.

[baytram366]

I think there are some good points in that piece (never thought I would say that about an Advertiser article). Personally, I wouldn't mind having to pay for tolls if we do get some decent infrastructure out of it and country roads are also upgraded, not just in the metro area.
I do find it curious that tolls were introduces very on in the building of what is now the Freeway but only lasted a few years...

[SBD]

I think there are some good points in that piece (never thought I would say that about an Advertiser article). Personally, I wouldn't mind having to pay for tolls if we do get some decent infrastructure out of it and country roads are also upgraded, not just in the metro area.
I do find it curious that tolls were introduces very on in the building of what is now the Freeway but only lasted a few years...

VERY early on! The toll house was constructed 1841, tolls removed in 1847. That's no tolls for over 170 years, and the road has received at least three major upgrades in that time, probably more.

[Westside]

I'm sick of this "I don't want to pay because I don't use it" crap. Yes, country motorists may never use an Adelaide metropolitan freeway, but I'm also not likely to use an area school in the middle of the state, nor drive on the Strzelecki, and I'll probably never get my share of the RAH back in benefits to me. We all live in the state, we all pay taxes, we all contribute to the greater pool of money for which our Government decides how to spend it. If we don't like their decisions, we have the ability to vote them out. Simple.

Even the article states that most likely half of all tolls raise go to private toll company's revenue. Umm, no thanks. We had the opportunity to raise revenue through a city car park tax. It skipped the middle man and went straight to government coffers. I know there will always be some waste in Government, but I'd hope we'd get more than 50% return from any tax raised! However, the people spoke and said no to the car park tax, so it was abolished before it began. I'd still be more inclined to pursue that option again before a toll is brought in.

[rhino]

I'm sick of this "I don't want to pay because I don't use it" crap. Yes, country motorists may never use an Adelaide metropolitan freeway, but I'm also not likely to use an area school in the middle of the state, nor drive on the Strzelecki, and I'll probably never get my share of the RAH back in benefits to me. We all live in the state, we all pay taxes, we all contribute to the greater pool of money for which our Government decides how to spend it. If we don't like their decisions, we have the ability to vote them out. Simple.

Even the article states that most likely half of all tolls raise go to private toll company's revenue. Umm, no thanks. We had the opportunity to raise revenue through a city car park tax. It skipped the middle man and went straight to government coffers. I know there will always be some waste in Government, but I'd hope we'd get more than 50% return from any tax raised! However, the people spoke and said no to the car park tax, so it was abolished before it began. I'd still be more inclined to pursue that option again before a toll is brought in.

Good post.

[ml69]

I'm sick of this "I don't want to pay because I don't use it" crap. Yes, country motorists may never use an Adelaide metropolitan freeway, but I'm also not likely to use an area school in the middle of the state, nor drive on the Strzelecki, and I'll probably never get my share of the RAH back in benefits to me. We all live in the state, we all pay taxes, we all contribute to the greater pool of money for which our Government decides how to spend it. If we don't like their decisions, we have the ability to vote them out. Simple.

Even the article states that most likely half of all tolls raise go to private toll company's revenue. Umm, no thanks. We had the opportunity to raise revenue through a city car park tax. It skipped the middle man and went straight to government coffers. I know there will always be some waste in Government, but I'd hope we'd get more than 50% return from any tax raised! However, the people spoke and said no to the car park tax, so it was abolished before it began. I'd still be more inclined to pursue that option again before a toll is brought in.

We are never going to raise enough money from a CBD car park tax to pay for massive transport infrastructure projects because you are taxing only a small minority of motorists.

The only feasible way to generate the sort of revenue required for N-S Motorway and other major projects is to effectively tax the broadest cross-section of the population possible.

To that end, I think the only feasible options are an additional “Transport Infrastructure” levy on all vehicle registrations OR an additional levy on all properties (similar to ESL). The property levy was used by the Gold Coast to partly fund its light rail system.

A key requirement is that legislation should be in place to ensure that 100% of funds collected by this means goes into funding these projects. This transparency is crucial to selling the levy to voters.

I think this arrangement would be more politically palatable than introducing toll roads.

[SRW]

The parking tax was to be used to fund public transport improvements only (ie, improving the alternate commuting option for those parking in the CBD).