The Federal government is trying to force the NSW government to
undertake two projects that it does not want to go ahead with.

The first is the rail line from Epping to Rouse Hill.

The Rudd government made an agreement with the previous state labour
government to build a line from Epping to Parramatta.
The problem with this project is that you can at present travel by
rail from Epping or Carlingford to Parramatta with one change of train.

The state government prefers to build the line to a growing area with
no rail transport.

The 2nd problem is a second airport for Sydney.
This will be a multi $billion white elephant.
By the time it is finished with the additional rail works required
it will not be needed.
The price of fuel and therefore air fares will be such that only rich
businessmen and politicians will be flying.
Indeed some experts believe that the airlines will be closed down
sometime in the next ten years. I know this is an earth shattering
revelation to some but fuel is already the largest single cost that
airlines try to manage with hedging.
The upshot is there will be less air travel in the future than now.
You no doubt have heard of peak everything, well this is peak air travel.

These two projects have all the hall marks of another labour disaster.

The Federal government is taking a take this money or lump it attitude.

Both have massive impacts on the Nation.
The airport if not started soon, sidelines Sydney as a tourist and business destination.
Far from the first Federal intervention, the Franklin Dam comes to mind.
I think if one level of government was to go, and it could not be the wasteful local government,State should go.

Well Belly, I guess you are one of those cornocopians who believe there
is no limit to what resources we suck out of the earth.
All the cheap easy oil has been found and is starting to deplete.
The only new oil is expensive, hard to extract and the wells have a
comparativly short life.

It will probably take 10 years to build the airport and then another
20 years to pay off the finance. Do you really think we will have
mass air tourism in 30 years time ?

The only way it could be financed would be with Australian government
bonds. A good way of insuring they will be worth less than Greek
government bonds. Australian bonds are risky enough at present.

Bazz, no prizes for guessing my angle on this. If Sydney is just going to be allowed to keep rapidly growing, then they are going to have IMPOSSIBLE issues with transport, and all sorts of other things.

I think it is highly duplicitous of the federal govt to be trying to force the NSW govt to undertake transport projects when it is the feds that insist on having very high immigration and consequently very rapid population growth in Sydney, and hence the need for much better transport infrastructure.

And it is also a bit rich for the state government to complain about federal pressure if they are not applying as much pressure as they can to the feds to reduce immigration.

Of course, what BOTH of them should be doing is listening to Bob Carr and working towards net zero immigration and a stable population for Sydney and Australia.

Then and only then there might some point in them haggling about transport projects.

Gentlemen I find it unfair to forget I too am more than concerned about population.
Bazz you slipped away from your thread like an eel.
You made no claims about population growth.
I saw a question about who should have the control not population.
While we visit the fringes of your first question, your favorite, peak oil, is blinding you.
Do not be miss lead by green fear campaigns, or petroleums self interest.
We are going to have fuels for century's, the world is not going to pass away as we do, not for lack of fuel.
The population, no matter what we want,even with no further migration, is going to grow in Sydney.
We can blind our self,divert the subject, find new problems, even if we manufacture them, in ALP.
But if we do not build that air port, even consider a very big one to be a replacement for the other,Sydney suffers.
As the thread slips sideways and up and down I am unsure what it now is about.
So may not return, lets watch.

Affordability will be the largest issue facing us moving forward.

The amount one spends is what determines the viability of any business and, as fuel increases, these increases have to be passed on, so eventually the consumer will stop spending.

As for fuel, farmers, truck drivers, and several others are about to loose their fuel subsidy, now add to this the certain impost of the upcoming carbon tax and many businesses will fold.

So I tend to agree that it would be a brave move to build another airport, just like it is building the NBN, when consumers can simply opt to not spend.

The boom in air travel has come about via cheap air fairs.

Take these away and the industry wil suffer, just how much is anyone's guess.

Better to have an air port struggling to meet demand, than demand struggling to service an air port.

I think we are in trying times (globally) and we would be best to sit on our hands at this point.

After all, our treasurer has only just started to come out of denial.