On the National Press Club today Mr Brendon Lyon of Infrastructure
Partnerships Australia spoke on infrastructure needs of Australia.

Most of his address was on problems of road congestion.
His organisation is proposing a system of road use charging to be
introduced in the future. This would be additional to toll road charges
and would be on all other roads. Congested roads would have higher charges.
He acknowledged that this would not happen soon but a discussion on
the form it should take is needed. Frankly it is a business as usual
proposal and will be irrelevant by the time it is introduced.
He hardly mentioned public transport except to say that the funds
"liberated" by the removal of registration charges could pay for the
dedicated rail freight line and the Sydney NW line.

As one who has no option but to enter one of Sydney's busiest main
roads I would get the highest charges without option.
Frankly I think he is away with the fairies if he thinks road
congestion will be the same let alone worse than it it is now in ten
years time.
Either car fuel will be too expensive for commuter use or it will be rationed.
Long distance road transport will have faded and that alone will
reduce congestion very significantly.

If this is the standard of forward planning that is being undertaken
now then as Dr Hirsch warned us we are in for really catastrophic
economic and social problems.

Bazz
What an absurd proposal. Now the citizens get to pay for the inefficiency of the NSW government's lack of forward planning as well as the curse of continuous economic growth and development foisted on a public who has been bemoaning the growth of Sydney/Melbourne and lack of corresponding infrastructure for years.

Does this mean the taxes paid towards road infastructure are to be refunded or reduced if we go down to a purely user pays system.

Is this the best we can expect from our policy makers?

What about some real action on population growth, decentralisation and infrastructure for regional areas. You won't get movements of people out of larger cities unless there are similar services in the regions.

I agree Pelican, we are being let down badly by both academics as well
as politicians.

I forgot to include the reference to Dr Hirsch.

http://www.netl.doe.gov/publications/others/pdf/oil_peaking_netl.pdf

However perhaps we should not be too hard on the planners.
If they try and plan to match the real world, their proposals will not
be accepted by the politicians and they could be out of a job.
I think many of the demands for funds for hospitals, roads, rail etc
have reached such a level that the government can only meet them by
borrowing.
Then when you see the struggle to get growth restarted
again with little success, then I guess borrowing is a one way trip to
disaster.

I believe we should use the resources we have to electrify the railways
and reopen branch lines. That would mean cutting all expenditure on
roads except some rural areas where a rail line never existed.
As much as people will think that is away with the fairies then they
should consider the following;
The year that the most oil was discovered 1964.
The year that consumption first exceeded discovery 1983.
The year that crude oil production stopped increasing May 2005.
The year that crude + all liquids peaked July 2008.
Consumption is now four to five times discovery.

We are now on a plateau and there is now no discussion about the time
of peak oil, that is history, the discussion now is around when
depletion of supply will become noticeable.
The argument seems to be settling around 2011 to 2016.

I maintain that these are fundamental facts that infrastructure
planners should be taking into account.
However they do not even appear as "risks" to future planning.
Certainly the speaker at the Press Club is quite gung ho that roads
are the way of the future, we just need to tax their use to cope
with a population in Sydney of 7 million.

Aaaaarrrrggghhh !

Yes pelican this is about as good as the policy gets. Ever since about half way through the Hawke government we stopped having progressive and visionary policy and switched to reactionary policy. If the polls went this way so did policy. This is how it has rolled ever since and with a shallow and manipulative media ramming home the the reactionary view governments have become weaker and less likely to do what is needed.
Look at climate policy. Without going into the rights and wrongs let's say we need action on carbon. The right thing to do is impose a tax or regulatory system to control and reduce emissions. This is obvious and the people want to see something happen, but as soon as it is pointed out that it will cost us all to do so we get great resistance. A good government will lead use despite the fear to this new place and help us understand that it is not the end of the world. What we got was a government that tried to do it by halves then spat the dummy when it failed topped off by an opposition that saw a political opportunity to play on peoples fear and confusion on the subject for self promotion.
We now have many of our major industrialists demanding that action be taken to fix a carbon price so they can get on with future planning, it would appear that most of the industrial sector knows this is needed but we still have governments to scared to act because it won't look good at the polls.
We are desperate for a real leader, one with courage, vision and strength. All we currently have is a government frightened of the electorate and an abusive opposition with no idea's just criticism.

""" We now have many of our major industrialists demanding that action be taken to fix a carbon price so they can get on with future planning, it would appear that most of the industrial sector knows this is needed """

No! They just figured out they can reap heaps of loot by skimming their share of the plunder!

""" but we still have governments to scared to act because it won't look good at the polls. """

And right they are, the people are smarter than them!

""" We are desperate for a real leader, one with courage, vision and strength. """

Nice dream can I join in?

""" All we currently have is a government frightened of the electorate and an abusive opposition with no idea's just criticism. """

Not frightened at all, they're just regrouping after we shot them down in their last failed attempt at trying to swindle us.

Don't worry Bazz, this will all sort itself out soon as the pinch is felt. We'll go down so screaming fast, only the smart will be prepared. Then we'll be able to usher in a new world order :)

"All we currently have is a government frightened of the electorate..."

I thought they were supposed to represent the electorate?

RawMustard

"No! They just figured out they can reap heaps of loot by skimming their share of the plunder!"

Actually if one could take the blinkers off they would see that emissions control of one form or another is going to happen. Business knows the earlier they can prepare the better off they will be.

"And right they are, the people are smarter than them!"

Terribly sorry but i disagree strenuously. My point was since governments became reactionary to polling real leadership has gone. The public are generally poorly informed and only interested in themselves not the nation. Just because people on this site like to try and get informed doesn't mean the masses of western Sydney would have a clue.

"Nice dream can I join in?"

Welcome i am a dreamer.

"Not frightened at all, they're just regrouping after we shot them down in their last failed attempt at trying to swindle us."

What? and you think the opposition would be different, hallo.

Peter Hume,
Unfortunately it has been a long time since they represented the electorate. The focus has been on big business and global economics. If they were representing the electorate they would make the decisions that are for all and the future then face the electorate and explain. Not say sorry for stuffing up or screaming abuse till we are numb

You lot are having some sort of a discussion to cover your own ars..
Maybe they think an AU carbon tax will be cheaper than a UN tax.
Allow the govt; to govern. The critasism is coming faster than any shift in policy.
There seems to be an intollerance toward the gov; the election is over, how about abiding by the decision.
Some constructive comment would be handy for everyone.

Up in Torres Strait some islands are supposedly under threat of flooding from rising sea level due to climate change. Yet, both federal & state Governments have no qualms about putting many millions of dollars' worth of new infrastructure at 1 m above sea level. Now, the engineering consultant firms design this infrastructure so that in one to two years it will require a major upgrade at of course the taxpayers expense. Local enterprise since amalgamation has all but vanished & yet many bureaucrats keep pushing the self-sufficiency slogan. So, with a possible flooding of millions of Dollars' of infrastructure & possible loss of habitation bureaucrats of both Governments still aren't looking at alternatives. It really is planning for the future at the most dumbfounding.

Individual, 579 and some others are worrying about the wrong problem.
The IPCC's projections have not taken into account the amount of fossil
fuels that will be consumed in coming years.
Their projections are basically for business as usual.
It will not be business as usual. If there is a supply crunch in a few
years time the big boys may well elbow Australia out of the petroleum
market and we will be restricted to the 45% of what we now consume,
from our local production.
When it happens most economies will contract so electricity consumption
will also fall. China's economy will also stall and not just because
they cannot continue around double digit growth year after year.
China has long term contracts in many countries, eg Iran, Iraq,
Venezuela, West African countries plus those oil fields that they have
purchased. They will insist on compliance no matter what effect it has
on other countries.
Coal consumption's energy yield is falling. The cost of extraction
around the world is increasing. It is only from a few suppliers that
large amounts of high quality coal are available.
Peak coal is expecte around 2025, although some say it will be
earlier. One Texas University study believes 2011 ! Hmmmm.
The fuels are not available to meet the IPCC projections of CO2.

This where the problem really lies as growth looks like being a factor
of past glories.

A good planner thinking about improving the lives and efficiency of getting around, getting things done on behalf of the public and the consumer would (have) planned more expressways, low-rent highrises in URBAN city centers that did NOT connect directly via road access to an expressway, and generally planned effective ways to allow traffic to separate more effectively based on likely intended destinations of the users, with a priority on on/off ramps, overpasses along major roads; instead, we had some sort-of attempts to do this, but after we let housing planners go nuts and draw up first, with some moderately-effective attempts to streamline traffic in what is essentially a city composed of endless residentual streets that merely have a few extra lanes between them, and everyone is seriously expected to chug along Victoria Road's 30 odd traffic lights, 2 speed cameras, 3-4 40kmh School zones.

But really, if people wanted to reduce congestion, they could make public transport cheaper and more plentiful (subsidy) and/or only give drivers licenses to more competent drivers with no dependence on medication to avoid a driving impairment.
Problem is, for this the government has to PAY money and get less revenue from the low rates of driving license applications- congestion taxes however, MAKE money- who cares about actually SOLVING the problem?

Our population is increasing.
Our debt is increasing rapidly.
Our arable land is decreasing.
Our water for farming is to be reduced.
Our energy sources are being sold overseas.
Our companies are being sold overseas.
Even out land is being sold overseas.
Our oil is depleting at 3 or 4 % per year.

We are planning for more roads !
Road planning has to stop now as it is counter productive.
How will we repay our borrowings plus interest when the music stops in China ?
By putting taxes on road use ? They have to be kidding !
Then the pollies want a BIG Australia.
Have they gone stark raving mad ?

""" Have they gone stark raving mad ? """

No they haven't Bazz. Must you be beaten over the head with a large stick several time before you see what it is that's causing you pain?

I know you're aware or Agenda 21, do you refuse to believe it?
Must you be hit over the head with a larger stick before you begin to believe it?

Agenda 21 ?
I remember hearing about it, but cannot remember what it was about.

The upshot of it all is that we are entering a, probably permanent,
period of very low growth, zero growth or contraction.
We need to use our advantage while we have it to prepare for a
different type of world economy.
There is no escape from the coming changes and they are basically a
reversal of previous changes. I guess that is what makes them hard for
people to accept.
We will change from cars to public transport.
We will change back to smaller houses.
We will stop using air transport for non essential transport.
We will stop migrating to the cities.
We will start migrating to the country.
We will start increasing the number of farmers.
We will start manufacturing locally instead of importing everything.

We are already seeing the start of this process and many of us will
not see it all because it is a generational shift in attitude.
For many of us the changes will not be acceptable and we will just
put up with a decrease in our standard of living for the rest of our
lives. The younger ones will adapt and the process will probably
begin a slow reduction in world population which will in itself solve
a lot of problems.

It all seems a bit grim, but I think it may well evolve into a better,
happier more sustainable lifestyle.

What is agenda 21;; I wouldn't mind betting it's got something to do with religion.
May 21 2011 is it.

Bazz, many people have seen or are seeing as you are. It's out of our control because many refuse to acknowledge the party is already over.

Those of us that realise the good times have past want to do all the things you mention, but we're not allowed to! Instead we are funneled into the existing transport corridors where we can be more easily controlled and our numbers reduced. The increase in population brought about by our masters is just a means of funneling people into areas of control. They also use this to create friction between the locals, divide and conquer. This is not just a local thing, it's happening in unison all over the world.

Here is a good site that attempts to explain what's happening and where our masters want to lead us.

http://green-agenda.com/index.html

Have a read through that site and you will soon recognise the pieces of the puzzle that have already been laid and the ones ready to be laid.

@ 579

Yes it has to do with religion but not the type you're thinking of.
The Green religion!

What is May 21 2011?

Green religion, there's only a couple of them, it can't be that bad.
Maybe we have tried the other way for long enough.
How long before things become unsustainable. Everything has got its limits. since someone invented the transister, electronics have exploded. How long before we get nuclear powered items. We already have smoke detectors with some sort of naughty stuff in them.
It may be time to have a broad look.

I agree with everything you've said 579, but you need to understand that's not what they're aiming for. Read the site I posted, educate yourself!

Agenda 21
That web site did not tell me anything.
It does not seem to an agenda of anything, just a list of quotes.
Can you please elaborate ?

""" Can you please elaborate ? """
Well I could but it's all there!

http://green-agenda.com/agenda21.html

http://www.un.org/esa/dsd/agenda21/res_agenda21_00.shtml?utm_source=OldRedirect&utm_medium=redirect&utm_content=dsd&utm_campaign=OldRedirect

enjoy! err... or not :(

It implies to me from both sources that Agenda 21 is nothing more than a UN proposition to write up a bill outlining a set of conduct to become 'environmentally friendly' and try to get nations to sign themselves up to it, and the other some loony website trying to make it look like an insidious attempt by anti-Christian flower-power greeny hippies to create a NWO of airy-fairy nature worship by force.

You know, I ridicule UN and many an environmentalist motion all the time (despite being generally in support of most motions)- I simply pick out bits I think are poor and explain why;
No 'US or THEM' required- I just pick and choose what individual issues to support and berate specifics I don't.

But when people keep trying to paint up some ridiculous strawman of a gigantic evil cartel whose only goal is to force one western-world demographic to give up everything they, by amazing coincidence, hold sacred, guess what?
Nobody takes it seriously.