<span class="" id="parent-fieldname-description"> Infrastructure Australiaâs 2013 National Infrastructure Priority List contains projects worth more than $80bn yet few proposals were actually recommended for federal government funding support, including rail. </span> <p>Just four projects nationwide received IA’s highest status – ‘ready to proceed’ – out of a total of 79 proposals submitted to IA for inclusion on the 2013 priority list. The list was contained in IA’s fifth report to the Council of AUstralian Governments (COAG), released last week. This year the number of projects added to the priority list more than doubled.</p><p>Being ranked by IA as ready to proceed appears to guarantee that a project will indeed receive federal funding, with all projects since 2008 making it to this category now having federal funds committed.</p><p>Brisbane’s Cross River Rail was one of the four projects granted IA’s ‘ready to proceed’ status.</p><p>The Queensland Government is looking for a 50:50 funding deal with the Commonwealth for Cross River Rail, however, whether the Federal Government will come to the party on the deal remains to be seen as just $715m of the $4.4bn total cost was allocated to the project in the federal budget.</p><p>Interestingly, while the ‘core’ Cross River Rail project was given IA’s highest ranking, the Queensland Government’s separate submission to IA for the project’s early enabling works – worth $302m – received IA’s lowest, ‘early stage’ status. This package of works is aimed at increasing the capacity of Brisbane’s rail network to accommodate growth occurring <em>before</em> the delivery of the actual project.</p><p>The Victorian Government’s Melbourne Metro – a 9km underground railway costed at between $9-11bn – was the only rail project to receive IA’s second highest ‘threshold’ ranking.</p><p>IA’s third highest ranking, ‘real potential’ was the category most populated by rail submissions.</p><p>The Victorian Government had a number of proposals in this category including the Dandenong rail capacity program, the western interstate and Melbourne international freight terminals and the government’s high capacity signalling pilot project on Melbourne’s Sandringham line.</p><p>The Queensland Government’s Landsborough to Beerburrum rail duplication also received ‘real potential’ status as did the New South Wales Government’s rollout of ETCS level 1 and a trial of ETCS level 2 on the CityRail network.</p><p>Australian Rail Track Corporation made it to this category with its North South freight corridor, which made reference to the proposed Inland Rail route, though no further detail was provided. ARTC also had a submission for the East West corridor.</p><p>The final rail project for this category was the South Australian Government’s green triangle freight transport program.</p><p>Unfortunately, a number of big-ticket rail projects received IA’s lowest, ‘early stage’ ranking. The Western Australian Government’s MAX light rail network and Perth airport rail line extension both came under this category, as did the NSW Government’s Sydney light rail along with the ACT Government’s light rail for Canberra.</p><p>Infrastructure Partnerships Australia – the nation’s peak infrastructure body – believes the lack of projects being recommended for national funding support demonstrates the need for greater funding and cooperation between all levels of government.</p><p>“Australia’s major cities are hampered by congestion and hamstrung by inefficient freight networks, but this is not reflected in projects moving quickly through IA’s priority list, or in increased national investment,” IPA chief executive Brendon Lyon said.</p><p>“IA is fundamental, but nationally significant projects will only progress if it motivates a new level of cooperation with state and territory governments, together with increased federal funding.”<br /><br /> </p>
