herbert henry1908
Referee
- Messages
- 21,880
I agree, been saying for ages that not only is $730m insane, so is a 45k seat venue. It’s a club ground 95% of the time.
Sydney only needs one big venue.
Register a free account today to become a member of the world's largest Rugby League discussion forum! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!
Kerryn Phelps... here today gone tomorrow
Not even his policy about grabbing women on the puss...y? I know this is off topic but Trump has created a lot of employment especially for the Has been comedians who couldn't even catch a cold for example Alex Baldwin , Kathy Griffin...
'Shockingly bad': Is this the state's worst election policy?
Labor’s pledge to reinstate "cash back" on the M4 motorway will put billions into the pockets of the road’s private owners, while encouraging more people to drive (and then to drive some more looking for a place to park). It might be the election’s worst policy.
Ever since the party was catapulted from office in 2011, Labor has struggled for a footing on the crucial issue of transport. Actually, the indecision probably set in well before 2011. Labor did manage to waste half a billion dollars conceiving and abandoning a metro rail line to Rozelle.
To some extent Labor’s difficulty in finding its perspective on transport can be traced to perceived divisions within its constituency.
Should Labor adopt the view – associated with progressive politics here but taken as pragmatic Toryism in places like London – that increasingly dense cities require a priority shift from roads to public transport? Or should it view transport through the prism of one side of a culture war – in which votes lie in fresh and free bitumen and in pandering to shock-jock derision of bike paths and trams?
Labor’s de facto resolution of these issues seems to have left the party holding two positions in opposition. For one, it has been an increasingly effective critic of the problems arising through the Coalition’s implementation of its own transport plans. Particularly under shadow spokeswoman Jodi McKay, Labor has helped expose a lack of transparency in decision making. It has also helped shine a light on the often cavalier way in which companies building government projects have engaged with those affected.
Related Article
Roads
Transurban rules itself out of North East Link build
Labor’s second position has been to make a virtue of the modesty of its own ambitions. Rather than asserting it has different priorities to the Coalition, Labor has often simply promised to hold fewer priorities. Rather than building light rail lines in central Sydney and Parramatta, as the Coalition has promised, Labor promised Parramatta. Labor will abandon the government’s idea of converting the Bankstown Line to a metro line linking to a new cross-city rail line. It will not build new motorways under Sydney Harbour, or south to the Sutherland Shire.
To be sure, there are a couple of weeks to go until the election, so more expansive proposals could emerge. And at the end of his hold on the job, former Labor leader Luke Foley did signal one interesting – and different – policy when, he said Labor would consider a new metro rail line towards the Sutherland Shire, rather than a motorway or the Bankstown Line project.
And Labor’s M4 policy is different. Labor’s promise to refund the tolls of motorists driving on a widened M4 is a qualitative break from the government’s position. This policy is shockingly bad.
The policy will encourage more people to drive. Tolls operate as simple price incentives. When we don’t have to pay a toll, we are more likely to get in our car and drive. Ridership on public transport falls.
You could fairly say governments should not be forcing people to use inadequate and overcrowded public transport. But another feature of Labor’s policy is that it would give future governments less money to improve that public transport system.
Bob Carr’s decision to implement cash-back on the M5 West motorway has already cost taxpayers $1.5 billion, and is set to cost another $1 billion over the next decade. Labor’s M4 promise would cost even more. Before Christmas Labor boasted it would cost only $113 million in the first year.
Labor’s de facto resolution of these issues seems to have left the party holding two positions in opposition. For one, it has been an increasingly effective critic of the problems arising through the Coalition’s implementation of its own transport plans. Particularly under shadow spokeswoman Jodi McKay, Labor has helped expose a lack of transparency in decision making. It has also helped shine a light on the often cavalier way in which companies building government projects have engaged with those affected.
Related Article
Roads
Transurban rules itself out of North East Link build
Labor’s second position has been to make a virtue of the modesty of its own ambitions. Rather than asserting it has different priorities to the Coalition, Labor has often simply promised to hold fewer priorities. Rather than building light rail lines in central Sydney and Parramatta, as the Coalition has promised, Labor promised Parramatta. Labor will abandon the government’s idea of converting the Bankstown Line to a metro line linking to a new cross-city rail line. It will not build new motorways under Sydney Harbour, or south to the Sutherland Shire.
To be sure, there are a couple of weeks to go until the election, so more expansive proposals could emerge. And at the end of his hold on the job, former Labor leader Luke Foley did signal one interesting – and different – policy when, he said Labor would consider a new metro rail line towards the Sutherland Shire, rather than a motorway or the Bankstown Line project.
And Labor’s M4 policy is different. Labor’s promise to refund the tolls of motorists driving on a widened M4 is a qualitative break from the government’s position. This policy is shockingly bad.
The policy will encourage more people to drive. Tolls operate as simple price incentives. When we don’t have to pay a toll, we are more likely to get in our car and drive. Ridership on public transport falls.
You could fairly say governments should not be forcing people to use inadequate and overcrowded public transport. But another feature of Labor’s policy is that it would give future governments less money to improve that public transport system.
Bob Carr’s decision to implement cash-back on the M5 West motorway has already cost taxpayers $1.5 billion, and is set to cost another $1 billion over the next decade. Labor’s M4 promise would cost even more. Before Christmas Labor boasted it would cost only $113 million in the first year.
There is little doubt Sydney residents are increasingly exhausted by the city's growing number of toll roads. Labor’s cash-back policy might be smart politics. But if implemented, we will be the poorer for it.
I'm exactly the same mate, Have never voted Liberal in my life but may have to do so in the coming state election. Only issue I have is Ayres is my local member and it would mean voting for him.
You are the fountain of most of the dribble in this thread.
i have no clue who my family votes for
you started it
