Who killed the infrastrucutre project

Threads relating to transport, water, etc. within the CBD and Metropolitan area.
Post Reply
Message
Author
Waewick
Super Size Scraper Poster!
Posts: 3401
Joined: Tue Jun 10, 2008 1:39 pm
Has thanked: 53 times
Been thanked: 110 times

Who killed the infrastrucutre project

#1 Post by Waewick » Mon Mar 14, 2016 11:31 pm

So the title of my thread was going to be in regards to Gawler - as that was the piece of infrastructure that I was discussing with rubberman in the trams thread (and apologies to rubberman for my conduct in said thread)

So, I finally got to a PC to lock in my poor PC research skills but here we go - for the record I have tried to avoid using documents directly from Political parties as we know they are skewed (I still contend that Ministrial staffers provide a lot of news for newspapers, but I have no direct evidence of this, just something I have been told by numerous sources both within Newspapers and from political staffers)

who killed the Gawler line:

Circa 2009
So the first piece of information I can find on this s:http://infrastructure.sa.gov.au/new_con ... s/?a=43748 (pg 15)

with the update here circa 2011

http://www.infrastructure.sa.gov.au/__d ... _Sheet.pdf

All fairly mundane

This is where it gets interesting:

Circa 2011
costs blow-out (which shows how many occur - whether that is a good or bad thing is up to the readers opinion I guess)

http://www.adelaidenow.com.au/news/gawl ... 6078130746

Project cancelled: 31st May 2012

http://www.adelaidenow.com.au/news/sout ... 6377253573

Then this is where i gets interesting (and murky)

Feds ask where the money allocated went and when it will be returned as the project had not proceeded yet - Feb 2013.

http://parlinfo.aph.gov.au/parlInfo/sea ... %2F0000%22

I can't put a page number on that so search Gawler.

I don't like Senator Edwards, but the responses to his questions , in the way in which I read it means that the moneys are returned and the project essentially unfunded by the feds at that point - i.e Government needs to reapply when they have funding

In my opinion, this is fundamentally when the project died.

Circa Oct 2014
Now somewhere along thing line - the state government reannouced the project - except only to Salisbury and not Gawler

http://www.bunyippress.com.au/gawler-ra ... n-delayed/


Feds pull there money - Oct 2014

http://www.adelaidenow.com.au/news/sout ... 6745622546

I found this part interesting, that they referred to it as earmarked - not committed.


An interesting piece from Mr Hooks perspective - this is dated 10th of July 2014

http://www.adelaidenow.com.au/news/form ... 864e9f343f


bit of puff/bullshit from both sides of pollies

http://www.adelaidenow.com.au/news/sout ... 3adf28b82d


Now, unfortunately I can't seem to find all the information to provide a better flow of information (happy to do so if people who can reasearch can find stuff)

but the way I read the flow of events is quite simply the delays of the State Government (from 2008 to 2014) simply moved that money from committed to earmarked.

now, this is a direct comment from Briggs - so take it as you want (which given recent events...)
Assistant Federal Infrastructure and Regional Development Minister Jamie Briggs said the Coalition had made clear during the campaign it did not intend to fund urban rail.

He also attacked the State Government for failing to consult with his department over the 30-year transport vision it released on Monday. He said $2 million pledged by the previous Labor federal government to help develop the plan would also not be paid.

"We were really dismayed by that plan, which had been released without consultation with us despite the fact that is seeking a lot of Federal Government money," Mr Briggs said.
To be fair, Mr Briggs is correct, Abbott was always a road person, we have him to thank for the South Road upgrade, but was this told to the SA Labor?

the Kut seems to not to think so
Mr Koutsantonis yesterday said he first learnt of the move from The Advertiser.

"Ripping this out is a complete act of bastardry on the people of the north," he said.

"The Prime Minister's personal discussions with the Premier were that if we'd gone out to tender, they would be honoured. "This is a breach of that promise.

"We've gone out to tender on Gawler, we had an agreement with the government of the day.

"They are killing this project and breaking the hearts of everyone in the north."
Given I have no faith in Koutsantonis, I believe Briggs - but others might not.

so my whole take on the debacle.
  • We pledged to upgrade the Gawler line
    We got Government funding
    We decided we couldn't afford our part
    Feds wanted their money back, and we gave it to them
    We re-announced a scaled back project without checking with the feds
    Feds said they weren't funding it
    We got sad and blamed the Feds for everything.
    We then spent the money building a tunnel under parklands.
If you read that article regarding Gawler being the better option that Seaford, the cyncic in you would suggest it was put first for Votes with the annoucement on the Gawler line made last year in full knowledge that they'd stuffed the funding up but needed to deflect.

The O-Bahn upgrade in its place is stil mystfying and I've got nothing to add to that.
Last edited by Waewick on Mon Mar 14, 2016 11:40 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Waewick
Super Size Scraper Poster!
Posts: 3401
Joined: Tue Jun 10, 2008 1:39 pm
Has thanked: 53 times
Been thanked: 110 times

Re: Who killed the infrastrucutre project

#2 Post by Waewick » Mon Mar 14, 2016 11:39 pm

What I did find interesting is that I couldn't really find a list of projects that the Feds had committed to and pulled out.

Once Abbott had won the election, there are quite a few examples of projects that hadn't commenced being withdrawn, which I found interesting but ultimately I couldn't see how far they had come (eg where they just pie in the sky).

The Commonwealth funding is generally paid in a lump sum up front - unless you are a private person/organisation, then it is paid in part in arrears (so once you've incurred the costs) so these projects the Government obviously cannot turn their back on.

But from what I can see, once you have a commitment from the Government, you are fine if you get the project underway in a prudent time. Something SA didn't do and personally even if the funding still was in place - I don't believe the works would have started anyway.

Goodsy
Legendary Member!
Posts: 893
Joined: Thu Jul 18, 2013 10:39 am
Has thanked: 10 times
Been thanked: 128 times

Re: Who killed the infrastrucutre project

#3 Post by Goodsy » Tue Mar 15, 2016 5:29 pm

So it's both the state and federal governments fault, and neither the state or federal governments fault? Let's just blame it on the millennials and move along

rubberman
Legendary Member!
Posts: 1267
Joined: Tue Sep 04, 2007 10:32 pm
Location: ADL ex DRW, ASP, MGB
Has thanked: 138 times
Been thanked: 225 times

Re: Who killed the infrastrucutre project

#4 Post by rubberman » Wed Mar 16, 2016 1:07 pm

The first instance of a Federal government withdrawal of committed funding that I can recall was in 1975.

The tram museum at St Kilda (AETM) had been awarded a grant under the RED scheme under which it would buy materials for its bus display shed, and build it using unemployed labour. The AETM and Salisbury Council had previously cooperated in the construction of the tramline under the same scheme.

The AETM had just purchased the materials, and lined up a supervisor, when the Fraser government axed the scheme. Thus leaving a rather impecunious voluntary organisation with a load of expensive material and erection to pay for. Eventually, the Feds paid for the materials, but the AETM had to pay for its erection.

I should add that the AETM had Federal Government approval for the project, plus Council approvals in hand before it committed to the purchase.

Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 5 guests