Simples - just give the CFMEU buckets and buckets of money and President Dan will build it for sure. But if you don't pay the CFMEU he will probably pay you not to build it. Ahhh.... the glorious state of Victoriastan.

We can build and pay for anything that'll make a quid! And we can! Just let's not privatise the profit stream and socialize any consequent debt!

And diabolically dumb stuff that brought the economic miracle the was the celtic tiger to not just a complete halt, but screaming backwards, hypothetical tyres screeching and smoking, in reverse gear!

Or created the GFC!

Let the people fund it, build it, retain it and all and any profit stream!

We already have copious wardrobes bursting at the seams with myriad suits of the Emperor's new clothes, sometimes referred to as PPP's and or privatization, or sold so as to build new infrastructure!

Financing infrastructure is easier for facilitating government, given it can after a business case is made, borrow for half what private entities need to find! For whom the problem of making a business case is also further compounded by the need to provide a dividend stream to alleged shareholders!

That said, private entities remain free to tender for the, time sensitive, penalty clause inclusive, work contracts and or material supply!

How do you suppose the oldies managed to build first world economy from a war torn virtually bankrupt backwater, into the third wealthiest nation on the planet and a creditor one at that!

Yes, let's not only build stuff, but get all manner of private entrepreneurial industry up and running as a consequence. And let risked capital, be once again part of the price of, bona fide, fiercely competitive, private enterprise!
Alan B.

Immediate extension of the Airport West tramway to the airport, plus construction of a high speed rail tunnel straight from Southern Cross to Melbourne Airport, would be a MUCH better solution than this MARL.

Yes, Aidan, building a tunnel through a heavily populated area, may well be the cheaper option! With little or no consequent land resumption requirement, included as an essential first step!

Therefore, could also be point A to point B straight line construction. Which lends itself to rapid rail? Rapid rail would ensure it was definitely the most preferred option, by the transferring traveling public?

Maximised fare paying custom and usage, will ensure commercial viability!

The distance short enough to allow a single rail and single reciprocating train as the first step? Essential to minimise initial outlays, maximise returns and have the project pay for any subsequent improvements?

Dual lines or a continuous loop and additional trains/capacity e.g.?
Alan B.

Wonderful Idea, provided the people of Melbourne pay for it. Most of the population of Oz have no interest in Melbourne, or it's airports.

In the same way I can see no reason for the people of anywhere but the northern suburbs of Brisbane being asked to pay for an under Brisbane river rail tunnel.

Public transport is a ridiculous expense, most of us who never use it, or even have it, are forced to subsidise. It appears to be just a way of giving inner city working bureaucrats & those who serve them a cheap comfortable commute.

Hasbeen,

What's ridiculously expensive is road transport in urban areas. Public transport is more efficient, and enables much of the enormous expense of upgrading the road system to be avoided.

And ITYF it's residents of Brisbane's southern suburbs (and the Gold Coast) who'll benefit most from Cross River Rail, though Northern suburbs residents will benefit too.

The generation who mostly never use public transport are dying out now.