Eratiks Your Say! Connex VS Lynne Kosky

[Member1100]

Welcome to our new monthly topic. Lately, Ive had several people comment to me about the lack of "worthy" or "relevant" topics of discussion taking place on this forum. This is an attempt to change that by providing a point for mature, well thought out and topical discussion about an important Public transport related matter.

So on to our first months discussion. State Transport Minister is under fire. In recent months, the general public have been becoming increasingly disenchanted with the state of our public transport industry. Much of the focus has of course been on rail operations, with the performance of Connex being put under massive scrutiny, along with Lynne Koskys performance as the minister for Public Transport. Kosky has been accused of lacking knowledge, or interest in her portfolio. Her latest gaffe was perhaps her attempts to level blame at Connex for a string of cancelled train services this week, when it would appear that many of the cancellations were a direct result of the governments lack of infrastructure maintainance. It has been stated by many, including PTUA chairman Daniel Bowen, that tracks and signalling systems are actually owned, operated and presumably maintained by the state government, not Connex.

Of course Connex hasnt gone through this unscathed either. Their customer service procedures, maintainance of trains, particularly air conditioning, their provision of adequate levels of service, the number of cancellations of trains have all been hot topics of discussion.

So whats your opinion??? Here is your opportunity to vent your spleen.

Should Lynne Kosky surrender her Public transport portfolio or has she been harshly judged?? Does she appear to not be interested in public transport??

Does she know what shes doing????

And what about Connex. Do they provide a good service??? What are the areas that you feel need most improvement on their part??? Do you think they have been unfairly judged???

Let us all know what you think.

[1whoknows]

Hot weather + rail buckle + mechanical failure = cancellations. It happened under the Victorian Railways, The Met, Hillside/ Bayside trains and Connex and will continue to happen under whoever runs the system next.

Kosky is an intelligent Minister who prefers to avoid getting bogged down in trivia over which she has no real control. If you pay someone to run the system that includes taking the flak when stiff goes wrong. She rightly attempts to stay above most of the crap about day to day delays, cancellations and so on.

However that leaked e-mail from a year or so back in which her viewpoint was made rather clear has naturally got the public's back up as they still like to maintain the fictional belief that Ministers do intervene in the day to day running of the public sector or that if they write a letter to the Minister that he/ she will actually read it.

Let's be quite clear folks, Kosky's main role in the job is and always has been to oversee the contract renewal tenders and to damp down the baying from the union hangers on, Greens and other dribblers who would like to see the system re-nationalised.

Victorians should be more concerned about the deal announced between the right and left factions of the ALP in today's paper - I suspect the results of that one will cost them Government next year if water has not already done so.

[Connex]

Hot weather + rail buckle + mechanical failure = cancellations. It happened under the Victorian Railways, The Met, Hillside/ Bayside trains and Connex and will continue to happen under whoever runs the system next.

That is so true. It doesnt matter who will run the network, these issues will continue to plague the system until the network's infrastructure is upgrades.

To say that Connex is to blame for these unfortunate events is absolutely unfair. Connex is paid to run the system and subsequently sub-contract maintenance out to private contractors. Rain, heat, lightning, power failures, incidents, the whole lot, are totally out of the Connex's control and for the Government to blame Connex for the network's poor performance is a total load of cobblers. The Government is ultimately responsible for the infrastructure, the trains and the like.

If the Government provides Connex with crappy toys to play with, you can't expect a perfectly smooth network to be running.

The Comeng air-conditioning issue has plagued the fleet since the day they entered service. You would have thought that the Government would have fixed this issue whilst the network was still under Government control. But no. They left the Comeng air-conditioning issue out in the cold, along with nearly everything else under the transport department's umbrella. The Government is blaming Connex for the air-conditioning fault, saying that they should have been upgraded whilst refurbishment took place. But, the issue of upgrading air-conditioning wasn't written into the Comeng refurbishment program contract. So it is fair to say that both M>Train and Connex had no need to look at the air-conditioning, as they weren't contractually obligated to do so.

The Minister for Public Transport is an absolute joke. She has told commuters time and time again that she doesn't want to be bothered by commuters issues with the public transport system. She's the Minister. Your supposed to listen to the public and do what is necessary to fix an aging and ultimately dilapidated system. If you don't to listen to the systems issues, your in the wrong job.

Bottom line is the Government is responsible for the network's failures, the infrastructure, and the trains and trams that Melbourne's network runs on. It doesn't matter who runs the network when the contracts are awarded. Just because Hong Kong's MTR is one of the best systems in the world, doesn't mean that they will run the system like they do overseas. Power failures, accidents, heat-warped tracks, lightning striking signal boxes, these are all things that will continue to occur no matter who runs the network.

If anything, its not just Lynne Kosky and the Brumby government to blame, but the governments that the network has seen before it.

[krustyklo]

This is an attempt to change that by providing a point for mature, well thought out and topical discussion about an important Public transport related matter.

Good idea. May I suggest in the light of it being mature (ie not turning into a bloodbath) and given many of the discussions may well be (as in this case) around who is being screwed by whom, that a good name for it might be Non-Violent Eratika?

Seriously, it is probably worth noting the following about those involved in the current debacle:
1. Connex.

* Are paid large sums of taxpayers cash to run the nextwork, far in excess of what the government paid itself to do the same job.
* Do not do a better job than the old PTC, MTA or VR for that matter - as someone else said in their defense:

Hot weather + rail buckle + mechanical failure = cancellations. It happened under the Victorian Railways, The Met, Hillside/ Bayside trains and Connex and will continue to happen under whoever runs the system next.

. Unfortunately it's a two edged sword, ergo, if they are doing no better than VR, MTA, PTC then why the hell are we paying them a lot more than we did those organisations?
* Do not own the trains (all leased, most but not all from government holding organisation), the track (Victrack owned - again a gov't organisation) nor even all of "their" employees (eg AOs are directly employed by the gov't - Connex used to play pass the cash from gov't to Travelsafe employees, but apparently did a deal to move them off Connex's books as Connex never really wanted them). Put simply, Connex take with one hand and give back much of it to the government through leasing arrangements, except the newer trains which are leased from other organisations. Connex don't even pay for refurbishment of anything - the government pay them to do it (see the early Track Records for how much and what for). All Connex do effectively is skim a large fee to run the trains.

2. Mainco.

* Are paid by Connex to maintain the trains and track, nominally to their specifications, but largely to DoT regulated specifications. This is where it gets a little grey, but I largely suspect that the same things apply here, ie Connex have little room to move to take much initiative to suddenly spend wads of cash investigating causes and implementing anything more than rudimentary fixes, unless the DoT agree to bankroll it.

3. Government (collectively)

* Own all infrastructure.
* Pay Connex with one hand to run the trains, whilst collecting some of it back in leases and fines.
* Micromanage the network - in the bold new world of railway privatisation Kennett style, NatEx and Connex had a freer hand to do things (note I didn't say free for all). Now they can't even sneeze without permission from the Dept of Transport. That means timetable changes, new services, etc are all managed and approved / disapproved by the government.

4. Government - Minister Kosky.

* From her reported comments is either a) disinterested in doing the job despite insisting she is 100% committed to the whole shebang; b) politically naive in making comments with the best of intentions but the worst of feet (ie in her mouth) or c) is being whiteanted by those who hate her guts in either government or bureaucracy (or both).
* Was no great shakes in Education (her previous portfolio) but didn't seem to balls it up as much as the media would have you believe she is Public Transport.
* According to someone else here:

Let's be quite clear folks, Kosky's main role in the job is and always has been to oversee the contract renewal tenders and to damp down the baying from the union hangers on, Greens and other dribblers who would like to see the system re-nationalised.

with which I tend to agree (ie with that BEING her job, not whether I think it should be her job).

If I have got the above mostly right then the relevant questions as I see it are (with opinionated answers of course):
1. Why do we (the taxpayers whose money the gov't spends on our behalf) think it a good thing to spend multiples of what we used to complain about subsidising the PTC with? It isn't because of the better service, novel ideas, etc from private sector management - Connex couldn't manage a piss up in a brewery, or at least no worse than their predecessors. That's not to say that there aren't organisations who could do a much better job - but Connex aren't it, yet we just rehired them to do the same average job they're doing now. Most notably, the UK DoT got rid of them from their commuter franchises for their continual requests for more subsidy over and above what they contracted for, same as Connex did here in 2004. Like the UK initially, we also handed over more buckets o' cash.

The reality is that Connex are there as a figurehead and scapegoat, they don't really run the service. Their job is to be paid to take the blame, pure and simple. They virtually do nothing else that couldn't easily be done more cheaply in house. For the sums of money they get paid, it would cost a fraction of the money to outsource paying and deploying staff, and would remove a middle layer between those whose contracted job it is maintain the trains and track thus removing one layer of middle men's mark up. As well as the markup Connex charge then return to their shareholders. Therefore, what do we as taxpayers actually get from Connex taking the blame? Absolute zip. So whose fault is it then?

2. Who should get the blame?
* In terms of the money trail - Connex - that's what they're paid for.
* In terms of the real causes - it's not all that simple. Firstly, whoever in the bureaucracy specified the Comeng trains air conditioning. It's never worked properly from Day 1, and for decades now has been a huge cause of failure every summer. The reason it is worse now is that we got rid of all the non air conditioned trains which were more reliable and got more air conditioned trains that I have no idea about, but has more points of failure, even if air con failure rates are reasonable, they won't be non existent. It may seem a trivial point, but that person for all I know may still be in a position to specify or agree to the proposed specification of these things now! (see Yes Prime Minister where Sir Humphrey is outed for a large mistake made as a junior official).
Secondly, whoever penny pinched the Comeng refurbishments not to include a significant air con upgrade/replacement, thus continuing to perpetuate the original fault.
Thirdly (and more generally), whoever is responsible for the infrastructure being as run down as it is, and whoever is responsible for forward planning trying to run a demanding timetable with not enough spare trains. In this case, it is clearly the government, but which part less clearly. However, ultimately, the whole shebang is the responsibility of one person under our current form of government - Lynne Kosky.

Kosky is an intelligent Minister who prefers to avoid getting bogged down in trivia over which she has no real control. If you pay someone to run the system that includes taking the flak when stiff goes wrong. She rightly attempts to stay above most of the crap about day to day delays, cancellations and so on.

However that leaked e-mail from a year or so back in which her viewpoint was made rather clear has naturally got the public's back up as they still like to maintain the fictional belief that Ministers do intervene in the day to day running of the public sector or that if they write a letter to the Minister that he/ she will actually read it.

Let's be quite clear folks, Kosky's main role in the job is and always has been to oversee the contract renewal tenders and to damp down the baying from the union hangers on, Greens and other dribblers who would like to see the system re-nationalised.

There are several errors here (not from the original poster as what he says I daresay is what the government believes too).
1. The gov't may well believe Kosky's job is to keep transport out of their hands. It will lose them the next election if they keep up the charade as nobody really believes it any more, and even those that do seem to believe that as the gov't pay Connex, that they are ultimately responsible for making Connex provide the service, even if they don't realise that the gov't specifiy every damn thing Connex do anyway. At least if they renationalise Melbourne Metro PT (for they still run Vline - a lot more risk from marginal Labour seats there to risk recontracting it out before the next election, and I doubt they'll do it after either), they get the unions on side before the next election, they look decisive instead of now where everybody looks stupid because noone accepts responsibility; they look as though they're taking responsibility, which everyone is attributing to them anyway; and they're taking a popular decision. The opportunity has gone to replace Connex with someone competent, although I doubt anyone competent would take the job as they would want to do things - and the DoT wants to be the one doing things, just not taking responsibility for what they actually do!

2. The current system of government says Kosky is responsible for public transport. Not just bits of it, not just "high level" stuff, not just her own personal favourite bits. She is responsible for public transport. End of story. If trains are being cancelled left right and centre, her job is to make sure that the problem gets solved. How she does it is for her to decide. She can bawl out Connex, she can throw cash at it, whatever. How she does it is irrelevant. She may think making loud noises through the pages of MX saying how she will demand this that or the other from Connex is the way to solve the problem, but nobody believes it anymore, least of all Connex, who no longer care now they have their contract renewed. Kosky may well be an intelligent minister, if she is as intelligent as you say, she will hopefully realise this. I somehow don't quite think she fully appreciates the crap she's in.

3. Connex are paid to take the flak when stuff goes wrong. Does that mean the system will be fixed? No, Connex have no means or authority to do so, they can merely suggest things to DoT, and I doubt much of that happens anyway as I suspect the real roles here are that DoT has all the initiatives and management role and Connex's role is to say "how high and where's the cash to do so?". At the end of the day there are reason why cancellations are high, why disruptive events happen on the network, and so on. There are usually systemic reasons why that happens. Some of them are probably high level issues that intelligent people need to look at. If Lynne is smart, she won't get involved in the "my train is cancelled and you suck because of it" type stuff, but there's too many recurring things happening that are being spun away as 1 in 100 events or "this was a really hot day so we have train problems" type thing that can and should be resolved at a high level. Unfortunatley while no-one takes the blame and plays pass the parcel, nobody has the incentive to fix it, least of all those ultimately responsible for it - Lynne Kosky as representing the government.

However, the blame game doesn't end there:
4. Under our system of government, every 4 years we vote in the people we want to govern us, to manage our trains, trams, buses, water, essential service supply (water, electricity, gas, etc) and so on. Since 1999 we have voted in the Labour Party to represent us in government. Whilst we keep voting in these people and don't hold them truly accountable, then ultimately we get the government we deserve. It's all very well writing a letter to the Herald Sun or MX, but what does it achieve? You vent your spleen, and the trains are cancelled again the next hot day that comes along. We are as bad as Kosky et al, we like to have someone to blame when things go wrong, but we aren't prepared to take responsibility for it. Yes, I can't fix the Comeng air conditioning on my cancelled train but I can raise it with my elected representative, the member of the opposition in my electorate and even form a "Comeg Replacement Airconditioning Party" if I think enough people would vote me in to fix the problem because the current party members don't take me seriously enough. Or at least form a lobby group and get enough members to wield influence in the lead up to election time (next year).

In summary (and apologies for the long post ) if we don't hold the government to accountability, if we let them avoid responsibility by outsourcing things just so they can point the finger elsewhere, if we vote in people who don't hold their own party accountable (the John Howard Senate problem) then I'm sorry my friends, but you and I are responsible for the current mess our public transport is in.

[krustyklo]

Power failures, accidents, heat-warped tracks, lightning striking signal boxes, these are all things that will continue to occur no matter who runs the network.

The problem is that these are all fixable issues. Just because it's the infrastructure we have, doesn't mean it's the infrastructure we have to have, merely that it was penny pinched and that redundancy or quality equipment was left out.

eg Warped tracks - the RFR doesn't seem to suffer from these issues. (apparently if you look carefully, the RFR delays are from non-RFR track eg Geelong line delays are from Melb to Werribee, not between there and Geelong). Those in the know suggest that if you have a deep enough trackbed, heavy enough rail and concrete sleepers, along with proper design and construction to allow for track expansion, then there shouldn't be many issues with extreme heat.
eg lightning striking signal boxes - poor or non existant lightning mitigation. Here's an old fashioned idea - how about a well earthed rod erected higher than any riskily earthed signalling related equipment designed to attract the lightning (lightning looks for earth). Or if the lightning knocks the power out, how about alternate power supplies ranging from a long lasting UPS (essentially a giant battery) to a generator that kicks in automatically? In our case - no, because it costs money to install and maintain, however negligible.

Accidents are about the only thing you can't really plan for, but even then there's a lot you can do to prevent them (quality fencing of railway lines in high risk locations - already being done in some cases) to designing, testing and correctly implementing emergency backup plans when things go wrong. A shuttle train going back and forth along one line past the incident location must surely be better than trying to ring around for non existent buses in peak hour surely. Yet we keep removing crossovers because they cost money to maintain for the "rare occasions" things go wrong. So we now run buses from the City or Victoria Park to Heidelberg during Clifton Hill trackworks because there's no alternative since we ripped out Fairfield. Frankly I'm surprised Bell has survived. Or have loads of angry Vline passengers sitting around at Broadmeadows because of a loss of power between there and Craigieburn and a stuck electric train. Ditto Dandenong. In both those situation I suspect the problem would have been a lot better managed if such scenarios were properly planned for.

[nonscenic]

Power failures, accidents, heat-warped tracks, lightning striking signal boxes, these are all things that will continue to occur no matter who runs the network.

The problem is that these are all fixable issues. Just because it's the infrastructure we have, doesn't mean it's the infrastructure we have to have, merely that it was penny pinched and that redundancy or quality equipment was left out.

I agree that these incidents are just as fixable now if not more so than they were in the past. It is successive governments who have not invested in infrastructure that leads to these incidents causing major disruption for passengers and freight across the network. In the past there were crossovers or sidings to allow trains to run single line or to stable defective rolling stock. Historically railways developed solutions to prevent the recurrence of past incidents and to improve reliability.
The need to invest in infrastructure is not about building new tunnels but improving capacity by properly providing redundancy and backup systems for the existing network. As other posters have said, Connex has little choice about how it runs the network - it relies on government owned infrastructure and cannot change timetables etc without government approval. Outsourcing has been shown to be inefficient as it only adds an extra layer of shareholder profits and overhead margins.
Kosky must realise that "the buck stops here" despite her attempts to buy a scapegoat. Having said that she inherited a position similar to "Captain of the Titanic". The consequences of decades of insufficient capital investment are probably too difficult to reverse unless. Any return to an efficient, reliable public transport system in Melbourne is about as likely as the reinstatement of passenger train services to Yarram!

[CB80]

Don't forget that MainCo are a 50/50 Joint Venture between Connex Melbourne and United Group Limited (was previously ALSTOM Melbourne Tranport Enterprises)

[krustyklo]

Kosky must realise that "the buck stops here" despite her attempts to buy a scapegoat. Having said that she inherited a position similar to "Captain of the Titanic". The consequences of decades of insufficient capital investment are probably too difficult to reverse unless.

She inherited it but had the chance to do something about it with contract renewals - and failed dismally to grasp the nettle and do something about it, however little.

As for the consequences of insufficient investment, the real answer lies with the RFR situation. The country network was a shambles too, but the government 'had a plan' (heard that before?). Yes it cost more than they said, but it got done and is the jewel in the crown of PT in thsi state, to the point of being embarrassingly successful. The same could theoretically have been done in Melbourne (albeit at more cost), but there aren't enough marginal seats in the city to justify the effort when the pork apparently could be much better utilised elsewhere. Having said that, I suspect this mob may be surprised at how seats can quickly turn marginal if little enough is done to placate the angry masses - I live in a safe Labour seat (Bundoora) and from talking to my neighbours, Mr. Brooks had better start doing a little more for us than he seems to have done, and be seen doing it too if he wants to stay local member. I'm sure he's not the only one...

[Coach_Captain]

Public Transport Privatisation back in the Kennett Days was a total failure...

Connex run a fairly good service using what rolling stock is avaliable to whatever path is avaliable. In the Western and Northern Suburbs, Connex share the track with V/Line, and those lines, especially Werribee/Williamstown and Sydenham are already at Capacity. Connex would probabily like to run a system like they do overseas, but with our historic infrastructure, it is not possible. Having only two tracks (up and down track) make things very hard, and because houses and other buildings are built right up to the railway reserve, the only way to expand is to tunnel, which is very costly.
Connex says that it needs trains in for workshop attention, however, this should be done at night, when services are less frequent.

This morning at Footscray, there was a 3 car Comeng ex Williamstown at 8:28am, and people at Footscray had no hope of boarding, as it was already full.
Why was it a 3 car train during peak time?? Probabily cause the other 3 cars are running another service, rather than cancel a service. And are the trains always full?? I have seen, and most of you have probabily seen, people crowd around the door, and wont move inside the carriage. But then you have the rest of the passengers who have no consideration for others and want to cram onto a full train, which delays the train further.

Rather than Kosy doing overseas study trips, maybe, she should look how systems work in other Cities in Australia. Perth has a great system, which runs very frequently, Sydney has a great system (apart from the lateness, but people are used to it) and Adelaide, although Railcars still, is moving to electrification.
Kosky should also give up her Arts Portfolio and concentrate on Public Transport, or at least give Public Transport to someone who will assist the operators in making Melbourne's Public Transport better.
How can a government minister concentrate on a portfolio when some have 2 portfolio's???

[Leyland B21]

I think any city should take a leaf out of perths portfolio. On the other hand perth pre-planed alot way before it could happen by leaving reserves whether in the median of a freeway or etc. I also agree to put the full blame on connex is a joke. I (and not everyone has to agree) for one put alot of the blame on kennett and the previous governments. For a long time the melbourne rail network was not a priority, the liberals in their utmost wisdom did not want responsibility and privatised. This led to most states, not all taking the same initiative. However once again alot of connex's cancellations (not all) are caused by signalling faults, copper wire theft, etc which are all under state government responsibility. Im not going to get to political as I feel it can lead to more of an argument than thread, however once again, our government whether liberal or labor or whatever just seems to be passing the buck. I am not saying Connex is not partially responsible for what goes on our rail system, but mrs kosky as said before, needs to realise her portfolio covers vic transport and needs to understand this is much more serious than a painting or sculpture in an art gallery or on the eastlink etc and agree if she cant take some blame (even to compensate for her predessors) then hand over the portfolio to someone else!!!

[observantone]

If you pay someone to run the system that includes taking the flak when stiff goes wrong.

I'll remember that for an Advanced Medical Institute advertisement. I certainly don't have problems in that department with my partner at the moment. Not yet anyway but I am barrelling towards my late 40s.

[melbtransport]

This is my opinion, but, I think that Lynne Kosky has to be sacked because she can't handle the transport system.......
With Connex, well I don't know, they can be good and can be bad or even ugly

[kizazzz28]

I think its a bit unrealistic to expect any change by sacking Lynne Kosky. In the end, no matter who the public transport minister is, these delays would still have happened. She, just like any minister before her, has limitations on what she can actually do and have control over. Its a bit like when Connex took over M-Train operations. I remember reading angry letters in the MX not long after the swap from stubborn disgruntled commuters angry over the fact that they had seen no difference in performance. How absurd!

Now in my honest opinion we should be even more angry at the Governments before Bracks/Brumby for letting Melbourne's already dilapidated system fall even further into disrepute. Cough Kennett cough. Its ultimately up to the Government as a whole to decide how much funding gets allocated to what and I think they are still slightly trapped in a time warp trying to live out the glory of the 1969 Melbourne transportation plan. The aim of having 20% of all trips on public transport is kind of underwhelming. Why not strive for something higher? Until they realize that a massive orgy of bland outer suburbs filled with McMansions and 12 lane freeways is not the sustainable way of life I think we will continue to get delays and cancellations on our trains. Something as simple as replacing a rotten timber sleeper from the 1950s is not that hard. And for god's sake get rid of the pebble mix shelters at Wattle Glen!

[system improver]

The latest Newspoll has Labor at 57% to Liberal/Nats at 43% on a 2PP basis ( http://www.newspoll.com.au/cgi-bin/poll ... ll_data.pl ) . This is the greatest lead, mid election cycle, any incumbent government has ever had in the history of Newspoll. Newspoll is regarded as the most accurate polling organisation in Australia. By way of comparision, two years out from the last state election, the Libs/Nats held a 2% lead, but lost 54%/46%.

Public Transport will not change one vote away from Labor in Victoria. It is a "Labor" issue i.e. it is an issue that moves votes to the Labor Party, not away. Education is similar. On the other hand, "Economic Management" and "Law and Order" are Liberal issues. This is why Labor spends more time (and money) on them.

There is only one issue (perhaps two) that Labor Party strategists care about in terms of maintaining power - economic management. This is why they ensure a budget surplus at all costs, even if it results in social damage. It has been the positive perception of Labor in this area that has resulted in its two biggest victories ever in the last two elections. And it is this which accounts for the current polling. The other potential vote winning issue for Labor is water. The Nats are opposed to the desal plant and the pipe - "because it only benefits Melburnians." The Libs have changed their position about ten times. They are in favor of desal (their idea at the last election) as long as it isn't built anywhere! There are opposed to the pipe - sort of. People know there is no point building dams when rainfall is reducing and they will reward any party that "guarantees water security". And, you can expect to hear that phrase many times in the next 20 months.

On Public Transport, the reality is that however badly Labor does, everybody knows that the Libs will do worse. They have form. That's the tragedy for those of us who would like to see real improvements to the metro rail network in particular. Clearly, Labor has delivered on regional rail, on better bus services throughout the state and on Southern Cross (well, on the 95% of it that is complete). They have recognised that Australians, in general, and Victorian, in particular, will not turn their backs on cars until the very last drop of petrol has been used. A sorry state of affairs, but there you have it.

And on Connex, I agree with a few other posters. They will be the sacrificial lambs. Take your pics while you can.

[Member1100]

With the tender process now in full swing, it is important for those companies who have submitted a tender, including Connex, to "re-negotiate" the terms of the contract before it is too late. And that may include said companies specifying that they will not take the wrap for the governments misdoings. While I have been rather critical of Connex in some areas, I also feel a degree of sympathy for them having to take the bad publicity over things that are not their doing. The government needs to stop passing the buck and get serious. And that means admitting that they have as much blame for all of this as Connex does....if not more.

Connex's shortfalls tend to be more in relation to customer service and communication, particularly when things do go wrong. However when things do go wrong, the initial problem is more often than not, completly beyond the control of Connex. Yet they still cop the blame, and the fine from the government.

My concern is that the government is merely using fines to transport operators for poor performance as simply another revenue stream, and not a proper deterrent/incentive for operators to provide a suitable service.

Which harks back to everybodys main problem with the Labor Government. Everything they do seems to be directly related to how much revenue it will bring in, rather than it simply being needed for the state.

[Fleet Lists]

Which harks back to everybodys main problem with the Labor Government. Everything they do seems to be directly related to how much revenue it will bring in, rather than it simply being needed for the state.

I think this is a problem with any government these days irrespective of which side of the fence they come from.

[Member1100]

Which harks back to everybodys main problem with the Labor Government. Everything they do seems to be directly related to how much revenue it will bring in, rather than it simply being needed for the state.

I think this is a problem with any government these days irrespective of which side of the fence they come from.

Well, yes you could be right. But certainly in Victoria its a consistent problem regardless of the issue.

With our trains, the governments solution is to fine the operators. That creates revenue.

With our consistently high road toll, they complain about the number of people dying on our roads, yet everything is structured so that people get a fine for speeding or drink driving. Again, its all about $$$.

With our roads, we need new roads in some areas, yet the government is potentially looking at tolling these roads. Again....$$$.

The Connex issue is only a small part of a much broader issue. The government needs to look at how it is going to get much needed projects on the go, rather than working out how much money its going to bring into state coffers.

[Fleet Lists]

Yes I wholeheartedly agree with that.

But I would like to take it one step further in that I find that big private organisations tend to talke the same attitude.

When they talk about compettion, they refer to who can make the biggest profit, not who can provide the best service.

Yes - the beancounters have taken over everywhere.

[VQ]

I've read everything in this thread and everything krustyklo I found very informative and I agree on it. Based on his points and what I know of the system.

We need Kosky out and someone who is dedicated to Transport, who will put it back in public hands and save us money.

In regards to the resigning of the connex contract she said "Privatization costs the same as it did in the last 2 years of public ownership" AFAIK they were packing most of it up and sending people on their way.

People are forgetting another victim here that there is no control of, Pacific national, run by Toll they have split them up so small they can hardly run the tiny rosters they have, with drivers leaving anytime there's an opening at Connex or V/line.

[Leyland B21]

This has been said before but once again tonight, 6pm Channel Seven News had big story about people asking for the sacking of Lynne Kosky.

Just thought it was relevent to the thread!!!

a couple of relivent links below:

http://au.news.yahoo.com/a/-/local/5269945/heat-wreaks-havoc-melbourne-trains/

http://news.smh.com.au/breaking-news-national/transport-minister-rejects-calls-to-quit-20090114-7gux.html

[Denning-6V71]

Well, I didn't vote Labor in the last election and I won't be voting for them in the next either (nor will I vote Lib). So you can't blame me for the state of the PT these days!
There've been too many election promises broken by the current State Labor gov't, that they don't deserve our votes in 2010 (IMHO they didn't deserve our votes in 2005 either, but that's another story). So, as krustyklo said earlier: "We get the gov't we deserve." If you want change, let your local MP and local opposition candidate know that PT will be as big an issue in the 2010 election as water, education and the environment. Write a letter or an email, then call them up, then write letters to the paper everytime Labor ballses up something it promised (miki anyone?) years ago that it conveniently ran out of money for. Don't sit silent until the next election, or else the same gov't will be elected, the same rail provider will probably be contracted (because they sit down and shut up while the media and public take pot-shots at them and the gov't shoves money in their pockets) and you'll STILL be stuck on the platform at 8:23, listening to the cancellation of the 8:24 Flinders St service and that Connex apologises for any inconvenience.
Cheers,
John

[system improver]

Since we don't have optional preferential voting in Victoria, a valid vote for the Legislative Assembly (where the government is made) will (eventually) be for either Labor or the Lib/Nats. Whilst you may cast a vote for someone else initially, it will always flow through to one of the two.

The reason there are so many cancellations this year in comparison with previous years is simple; there are more services but the same number of trains.The last two timetable changes have added more services to the peak service. (Maybe someone knows how many.) There are now more afternoon peak services that at any time in the last 50 years. There are two ways to achieve this, buy more rolling stock (which they are belatedly doing) or get more out of your existing rolling stock (which they are currently trying to do). We have always had a very high 'out of service' proportion. Until recently, less than 80% of stock was available for service at any given time. That's an enormous amount of rolling stock capital tied up in dry dock. International comparisons suggest 90-95% should be the target. But this can only be achieved by a) rectifying any habitual problems with the stock (eg Comeng A/C) and b) increasing the maintenance budget to ensure more stock is available.

Also, "in the old days" there was at least one spare train stationed at Flinders Street. Not with privatisation - it's too expensive. There's still plenty of room, either at the western end of 1 or at 13, especially if the the old 11 was retracked. But it's cheaper to bring one from Nth Melb, which can be done off peak, but it's pretty impossible in peak (assuming a train is available).

[RailwayBus]

Also, "in the old days" there was at least one spare train stationed at Flinders Street. Not with privatisation - it's too expensive. There's still plenty of room, either at the western end of 1 or at 13, especially if the the old 11 was retracked. But it's cheaper to bring one from Nth Melb, which can be done off peak, but it's pretty impossible in peak (assuming a train is available).

Standby trains are provided each day (including during peaks) at the following locations: Melbourne Yard, North Melbourne, Macaulay, Epping, Camberwell, and are always used. But when you run out, then you end up with cancellations.

[system improver]

Also, "in the old days" there was at least one spare train stationed at Flinders Street. Not with privatisation - it's too expensive. There's still plenty of room, either at the western end of 1 or at 13, especially if the the old 11 was retracked. But it's cheaper to bring one from Nth Melb, which can be done off peak, but it's pretty impossible in peak (assuming a train is available).

Standby trains are provided each day (including during peaks) at the following locations: Melbourne Yard, North Melbourne, Macaulay, Epping, Camberwell, and are always used. But when you run out, then you end up with cancellations.

I'm glad you agree.