INDUSTRY ASSOCIATIONS
History must not repeat with Inland Rail In his monthly column, Australian Logistics Council CEO Kirk Coningham discusses the hurdles challenging one of the most important infrastructure projects in Australian history: Inland Rail.
S
UPPOSE AN INFRASTRUCTURE project had been identified as a priority by Infrastructure Australia, and was also supported with significant investment from the Federal Government. Suppose further that contracts had been signed, and construction work was underway. In an ideal world, that would be sufficient to guarantee the project’s completion within the agreed timeframe and adhering to agreed routes. Yet the unfortunate experience with some significant freight transport infrastructure projects in Australia over recent times has shown this outcome cannot be taken for granted. Case in point – the Perth Freight Link (sometimes referred to as Roe 8) in Western Australia. This major road project was intended to alleviate significant congestion on a key Perth metropolitan freight route, and address poor access to Fremantle port and other strategic industrial areas. The project had been nominated as a high priority project by Infrastructure Australia, and was also supported with significant investment from the Federal Government. Contracts had been signed, and construction work was underway. However, it also attracted trenchant opposition from some local residents and environmental activists. The campaign waged by these groups succeeded in persuading the then-State Opposition to oppose the project. When the opposition won the subsequent election, the project was abandoned. Sadly, this is not an isolated case. In late 2014, the incumbent Victorian State Government had committed to building Melbourne’s East-West Link, to alleviate significant congestion in the passenger and freight traffic network. As in the case of the Perth Freight Link, Infrastructure Australia had verified the project’s economic value, contracts had been signed and the Federal Government had made a significant financial commitment. Yet, consistent opposition from activist groups and local residents persuaded the then-Opposition
www.railexpress.com.au
that the better electoral bet was to oppose the project. They did so – and upon winning office, immediately abandoned the project. It is worrying to think that some of these same patterns could start to impact the Inland Rail project, with local farmers and residents in some locations seeking to alter the alignment, and the Queensland State Government still not signed up to an Intergovernmental Agreement allowing work on the project to proceed in Queensland. Australia’s ability to meet a growing freight task into the future – and the capacity of Australian households and businesses to obtain their goods efficiently – will depend on the infrastructure investments we make, and commit to, today. Of course, the delivery of significant infrastructure projects like Inland Rail are complex undertakings that require careful negotiation. But experience has shown these issues can be worked through. With the state governments of both Victoria and New South Wales having already signed up, it is critically important that Queensland soon does likewise, so that freight operators and regional communities have the certainty they need to plan for their future.
Australian Logistics Council CEO Kirk Coningham.
Infrastructure investments will be critical to managing our future freight task.
RAIL EXPRESS | ISSUE 5 2019
61
