<span class="" id="parent-fieldname-description"> COMMENT: The Federal election is just a few days away now and apart from a brief moment in the sun for rail last week, it looks unlikely there will be any last minute big-ticket spending infrastructure promises, perhaps predictable given the nationâs current tight fiscal situation and the âdebt is badâ mantra dominating the campaign. </span> <p>Forgive me while I digress for a moment, but other than a perception of ‘going through the motions’ it has been difficult to work out exactly what the choices are in this election. Certainly both sides of politics have been shy when it comes to real policy initiatives as opposed to those policies that appear to be nothing more than tinkering around the edges – as is the case with infrastructure.</p><p>As discussed in my latest column in the Spring print edition of Rail Express magazine, the Australian Business Council has suggested that incurring debt in order to provide quality infrastructure at a time of low interest rates and high credit ratings, is not such a bad thing.</p><p>Yet has either of the major parties picked up on this and gone on to launch a major policy initiative focusing on infrastructure?</p><p>Sadly, the answer is no.</p><p>For rail there is nothing of note on offer other than re-hash of what has gone before. There was a bit of flutter in the pre-election circus with Kevin Rudd’s promise of $52m towards high-speed rail (HSR) on the east coast, and as far as announcements go this one made a bit of sense.</p><p>Labor has indicated that if re-elected it would also legislate to protect the 1,748-kilometre route required for the proposed HSR corridor linking Melbourne, Canberra, Sydney and Brisbane. Although construction is not slated to commence for at least another decade, the $52m spread over the next four years for initial corridor preservation and for the establishment of a HSR secretariat would be at least something to keep it ticking along.</p><p>Rudd’s announcement came on the same day that the government appointed High Speed Rail Advisory Group released their review of the HSR study, in which they suggested that HSR could be built earlier and cheaper than suggested by the study, although construction would still not start until 2022 if the project were to proceed.</p><p>The Coalition obviously don’t see any votes in this with Tony Abbott’s initial reaction being along the lines  of being more interested in what’s happening now rather than what’s going to happen in the future.</p><p>Ironically, one of the electorate’s major criticisms of our politicians.</p><p>The other perennial election favourite, the Inland Rail route also garnered a few headlines.</p><p>Both major political parties have given their backing to the eventual construction of the $5bn, standard-gauge, primarily freight link, between Melbourne and Brisbane.</p><p>Shadow minister for infrastructure and transport Warren Truss has committed $300m to the project, although this would be the same $300m that Labor provided for the project in the 2011 Budget and which has yet to be spent. </p><p>Truss said that if the Coalition parties are elected to government Australian Rail Track Corporation (ARTC) will be tasked with formulating a staged 10-year implementation plan with the aim of starting construction in 2016 with a projected completion date of 2026.</p><p>The Labor government has re-affirmed its previous commitment of $300m towards pre-construction work and corridor preservation on the Inland Rail route, although this will not be available until 2014/15.</p><p>Neither party has made any major commitment to the remainder of the substantial funding required for the project.</p><p>The Coalition stole the headlines with the Inland Route story highlighting one of Labor’s major problems in that its commitments to quite a few rail projects were made some time ago in the May Budget and have therefore lacked that touch of pizzazz in the context of the election campaign.    </p><p>At one stage it looked like Labor’s ongoing support for urban rail projects, principally in Perth, Melbourne and Brisbane might have gained them some traction following the Coalition’s point blank refusal to commitment to urban rail funding if elected to government.</p><p>Back in my April column I suggested that this clash of views could end up being a vote winner, but in the greater scheme of things, and despite the efforts of the ARA to revive the issue recently, it would appear the moment has passed. The only exception might be Melbourne, where Abbot’s pledge of $1.5bn to the East West road tunnel has generated considerable community opposition, most of whom are more in favour of the Metro rail tunnel</p><p>As the ARA intensified its campaign on issues of critical importance to the rail sector in the lead-up to the election ARA Chairman Lindsay Tanner was spruiking rail’s benefits and expressing concern over the risk of cutting federal funding for state projects and called for greater investment in an integrated transport system that links our roads, rail and ports.</p><p>“Lack of federal funding for passenger and light rail networks will effectively put the brakes on our nation’s economic development,” he said.</p><p>“Queensland is ready to move on its Brisbane Cross River Rail, WA is ready to move on its MAX Light Rail and Airport Link and Victoria is ready to move on its Melbourne Metro Tunnel.”</p><p>Come Saturday it seems we will be facing a future that largely encourages us to either take the railway or the highway.</p>
