Victor P Taffa

While the Rees Government seeks to balance our books one must ask at what cost? Some months ago a lady from Cowra in Southern New South Wales rang me and outlined what exactly the State Government was planning to do to the New South Wales Railways.

Currently an Act of Parliament is required to close a Railway line. While stopping regular services does not require legislation, if the railway corridor were to be sold then an Act of Parliament would be required for this purpose. Despite numerous branch line closures there has not been a bill presented to Parliament that would seek to close a railway permanently. Over many years’ services have been curtailed however the Government still owns many hundreds of kilometres of valuable land throughout the State.

The township of Cowra has the Lachlan Valley Heritage Railway as a working tourist railway and commercially viable freight trains that also operate. Enter the influential and resourceful Lachlan Regional Transport Committee. At a meeting held recently one of the agenda items read as follows:

“Indefinite Possession” was taken on the Koorawatha-Greenethorpe line as from Wednesday 1^st July 2009. What does “Indefinite Possession” mean?

On the one hand the railway line would close and the Rees Government could sell the land. Rather than trying to move an Act through Parliament to permanently close the line, the Government will introduce enabling legislation to circumvent the need to pass a separate bill close down a railway line.

Cowra is not alone. The Rees Government is keen to close the Newcastle Railway and disable the city of Newcastle from the rest of the world. Developers are excited at the prospect of taking ownership of the land that currently is the Newcastle Railway.

In order to redevelop the Newcastle Railway corridor the Rees Government will pass legislation that will circumvent existing laws and this would give the Minister the power to close down the entire New South Wales Railways with the stroke of a pen. This same measure is how successive Labor Government’s closed down the Sydney, Newcastle, Maitland and Broken Hill tramways. So who would we believe? Rob Mason, CEO Rail Corp declined to comment and Transport Minister David Campbell confirmed this publicly in The Sydney Morning Herald on September 14, 2009. Mr. Campbell did not return our phone calls.

Given the track record of the New South Wales Government who would believe their denials?

Is this the end of the line for the New South Wales Railways?

Tony Galloway

The truck driver who drove into the side of a V-line passenger train at the Kerang level crossing and killed eleven people has been acquitted of all charges.

He “Couldn’t explain” why he didn’t see the crossing signals and was acquitted by a Jury.

The members of the jury must have never seen a train from the inside. Possibly they themselves also crossed rail lines without looking and trusting trains is very rare.

Therefore they thought it was normal and the truck driver had just bad luck to be there at the wrong moment.

This is definitely a case of entrenched car mind-set. The Kerang trial was told that level crossing lights were hard to see.

The trial of the truck driver accused of causing the fatal Kerang train crash has been told about problems seeing warning lights at the level crossing.

As at September 2009 the Brumby Government has failed to install boom gates at any of the Kerang level crossings.

Why didn’t John Bradfield build Metro in the 1920’s and why did John Whitton build the New South Wales Railways?

Victor P Taffa

Ever since the development of the railways in New South Wales by John Whitton and John Bradfield in the nineteenth and twentieth centuries’ the Government of New South Wales and thus the taxpayer has owned and operated the Railways.

The Federal and State Governments all support a privately owned and operated Metro Rail. If this was the case it would signal the beginning of the end of Government run railways.

The first Railway in New South Wales began operating from Sydney to Parramatta on 26 September 1855 and the first electric train ran from Sydney to Oatley on March 1, 1926. One of the world’s most famous examples of a Metro Rail network is the London ‘Tube’ which began operations on 10 January 1863.

John Whitton

So what is the difference between a ‘heavy’ railway and a ‘metro’ railway? This is also different again to ‘light’ Rail.

The major difference lies in the strength of the design of the carriages used. Heavy Railway carriages are built with a heavier weight and thus can haul a heavier load. Metro Railway carriages are designed for underground operations and are shaped to fit the design of a tunnel.

Some people support metro rail because they are single deck carriages. Trains have been single deck since 1855 and from 1926 and electrification Sydney used Tuscan ‘red rattlers’ which were single deck. On the other hand metro rail uses single deck carriages only with minimal seating and maximum standing room. Some might call this ‘cattle class’. The introduction of double-deck Tulloch trailer carriages commenced in 1964.

Metro rail also does not need pantographs and overhead wiring but relying on a third ‘live’ rail between the two tracks. The major drawback from this is that metro rail cannot integrate with a heavy rail network nor operate on streets as is the case with trams or light rail vehicles.

Another of the differences with heavy and metro rail for Sydney is that our heavy railways are publicly owned and the proposed metro rail is to be privately owned and operated. The result of that would be higher fares than the Rail Corp pricing structure. For many years New South Wales Treasury officials have been concerned about recovering more than the present level of 25% of the overall operating costs of the Railways.

Again this is a fallacious theory. Railways are designed to provide a service and making a profit is not the primary aim. Even when Sydney had the second largest tramway network outside of London in the British Empire, only did the Watsons Bay line return a profit and was also the only line to be re-opened after closure before its final closure on 9 July 1960.

Nick Lewocki, Secretary of the Rail, Tram and Bus Union (RTBU) says

“The proposal to promote a metro rail in Sydney has nothing to do with good or proper transport planning but everything to do with risk minimisation. People in Government believe if private sector operator rail services then the public will not blame the Government. The Victorian experience clearly shows voters hold the Government responsible for public infrastructure. The New Zealand Government has bought back all their rail tracks and infrastructure.”

Even the construction of privately operated Toll roads has been with an ambitious level of patronage. People have either ‘voted with their feet’ by not using the Toll roads or the traffic flows were not correctly calculated.

So why are the Federal and State Governments all overwhelmingly in favour of metro rail? Are political parties in receipt of financial donations from companies who will end up operating the metro lines?

Is the construction of fifteen storey towers of apartments in the Inner west at Leichhardt the only way to justify the construction of a metro rail? Leichhardt is a great place to live but are we all expected to sell up and move to the Inner west and vacate our existing suburbia?

Ever since the post world war two population and housing boom new suburbs have grown and no new railway line constructed. Why hasn’t successive State Governments built new Railway lines to all these ‘new’ suburbs?

Since 1956 with the completion of the city circle line there has only been four new lines built in addition to the closure of the Tramway network in 1961. These are the:

• Eastern Suburbs line (1979)
• East Hills-Glenfield (1984)
• Airport line (2000)
• Epping-Chatswood (2009)

East Hills platform 2 from Glenfield

This clearly demonstrates that our Railways have not kept pace with population growth. Legislation passed through the New South Wales Parliament recently gave new powers for the construction and land development of new metro lines. Is this sensible planning when Rail Corp was not given the same powers?

When you consider that it took 100 years and at a cost of $168 Million the Eastern Suburbs line was truncated at Bondi Junction and bogged down in political dramas. The same costing and construction malaise is also affecting the Epping to Chatswood line. This project was initially to run from Parramatta to Chatswood at a cost of $1.4 Billion. By 2003 the project had been curtailed from Epping to Chatswood at a cost of $2.6 Billion.

The Alice Springs-Darwin Railway took 100 years to be constructed and even then it only went to Palmerston thus leaving the Darwin C.B.D without a Railway Station.

These two examples clearly show why there is need for a Railway Construction Act. This would still require an E.I.S to be conducted but there would be no need for approval from Local Government or from the Minister for Planning.

So why didn’t Sydney get metro in the 1920s? The two men John Bradfield and John Whitton both fought with vigour for a heavy railway. The New South Wales Governor of the day Governor Denison wanted horse drawn tramways. John Whitton knew that a Railway could be better placed to transport freight. John Bradfield also had extensive plans for other Railways that has either never seen the light of day or where tunneling commenced and platforms constructed.

Metro also relies upon a branch line system so trains can operate with high frequency. Metro rail thus is merely a shuttle service. Firstly Sydney has four branch railways and many country branch lines. In Sydney they are the:

• Carlingford
• Cronulla
• Eastern Suburbs
• Richmond lines.

Bondi Junction, the end of the line....

How would Sydney cope if the city circle line had not been connected or if the East Hills line was still a branch line? Metro in contrast is a separate branch system. Many years ago a number of country branch railways were closed throughout New South Wales. In by gone days branch railways may have been effective but the very nature of being a branch line ultimately led to many line closures. What is required are new inland railways to and intersect with existing branch lines.

When you build a branch metro line you may have ten to fifteen years before capacity is reached. Once a branch line is constructed the cost to extend it is as high as building another separate line. By building a ‘through’ line with cross over tracks trains can terminate .Branch line operations are very restrictive. After thirty years of operation the Eastern Suburbs Railway has branch line operating restrictions and if Governments pursue branch metro lines then they are embarking on a transport planners ‘folly’.

Former Premier Bob Carr announced that Sydney would get metro. The North-West metro was canned, the South- East metro delayed for another century and now there is the Metro West line to Rozelle.

Sydney was established in 1788 and planning has never been a strong point. Do these metro lines that have been announced represent real planning on a courageous level or is this decision making to last till the next election?

In June 2001, the then Coordinator General of Rail Corp Ron Christie outlined a comprehensive series of plans to upgrade and expand the Sydney Metropolitan rail network.

When Governments are as convinced on the need for metro as they are, why is there no overall plan that encompasses the next thirty years?

Why does metro rely solely on the use on old heavy railway corridors, tunnels and platforms that were a part of Dr. Bradfield’s ‘grand plan’?

John Bradfield

Why can’t the existing heavy railways be upgraded and expanded? Another argument for metro over heavy rail is that metro can operate on elevated tracks. Former Queensland Premier Peter Beattie constructed an elevated heavy railway to Brisbane airport.

Metro is also said to be faster. Japan has a heavy railway known as the ‘Bullet’ train that travels at speeds in excess of 300 Km/h. Metro relies on driver less operations and even with no guards. Aircraft require a pilot to fly them. How the aeroplane that flew into New York’s Hudson River would have operated without a pilot?

Why should Sydney operate trains without a driver? There has been a driver and guard operates a train in New South Wales since 1855 so why start now? Passenger safety is paramount and commuters would not trust a computer screen or foot sensor when boarding or alighting from a metro train. Computers can never adequately protect passenger safety.

There are also ongoing calls to privatise rail maintenance. Metro lines would still require maintenance and railways in New South Wales have always been operated publicly.

The coroner reported that the poor condition of the ‘permanent way’ (tracks) led to the Granville Rail Disaster that claimed eighty-three lives on 18 January 1977.With rail maintenance being cut back now and a privately operating metro in place are we headed for another disaster the scale of Granville?

When you know where you have been, you can know where you have to go. Our Railway planners who gave New South Wales one of the best Railways in the world fought the arguments and those who are trumpeting the virtues of metro for Sydney has no idea of where we’ve been or how we got to where our railways are now.

London 'Tube' train arrives at Baker Street

Victor P Taffa

How many single lane roads exist?

How many single lane railway lines exist?

The answer to the first question is none and the answer to the second question is too many to name.

Over many decades obstacles and excuses have been put in the way to stop heavy railway construction. Since the advent of the Department of Planning in the 1970s many people have sought to justify their opposition to heavy railway construction on the basis that new urban planning had to be a reason to build a railway line.

How many suburbs throughout Sydney have been built without a railway line? The answer is countless. Even as we speak the Oran Park raceway is being turned into housing and no new railway line has even been considered.

The proposed South West Leppington railway sounds great however a railway line running from Macarthur to Parramatta and then to Epping will be of greater value to the South West of Sydney than a small circle loop that is being built simply to suit the Department of Planning.

On Thursday 26 March 2009 on Radio 2GB on the Ray Hadley programme Planning Minister Kristina Keneally said “the duplication to schofields will be done when required.” When I travelled to Riverstone recently the issue that concerns local residents is that new development will occur without the duplication of the Richmond railway line.

Had the Richmond line been duplicated thirty years ago then the current Minister for Planning would not need to make such comments regarding the duplication of the line. As with roads that lead to Richmond and Riverstone at least they are 2 lanes wide. The railway line is only 1 lane wide.

Again the argument that railway line duplication will occur when the need arises is a spurious argument because patronage on a railway will only ever increase if trains can operate in both directions simultaneously.

We do not have single lane roads so why do we have single lane railway lines?

Single lane railway lines may have suited times of the past but in 2009 they are simply inadequate. Once again when you consider Urban Planning on flood prone areas of land if the Department was professional in its approach then drainage basins or tunnels would be built.

Instead people are only concerned about approving developments and ignoring the need to improve the railway line or drainage. For many decades nothing was done for flood prone West Ryde and Eastwood and only when the floods hit in the 1980s was the Mons Avenue West Ryde drainage tunnel built.

When the Richmond Railway line is duplicated it should also extend to Mount Victoria. Is this under consideration with the Department of Planning? The need to extend the railway to Mount Victoria is to provide a safer and faster alternative to the narrow and windy section of the Western line at Glenbrook. It would not mean a closure of the Western line but an improvement to it.

Richmond Line Terminus

According to locals Richmond Railway Station is built at the lowest point at sea level. The underground car park to a shopping centre that is lower than sea level was also approved and yet nothing has been done to offset the flooding problem. When the Richmond railway line is extended there would be a bridge over the Hawkesbury River and the Richmond railway station would be a 4 platform twin island station. So as not to split the township in two the station would be placed underground.

If the problem with this lies in the flooding issue of Richmond then a drainage tunnel similar to the Mons Avenue West Ryde should be built. The need to expand our heavy railway lines is undeniable.

To justify their construction through the Department of Planning does not stack up. With all of the constraints on heavy railway construction it is amazing that New South Wales was ever able to build a railway system.

If we don’t need to separate railway line planning from urban planning then why did the State Government pass special private Metro Rail legislation through the Parliament?

What is required is The Railway Construction Act. This would allow for the construction of above/below ground or elevated railway lines wherever the need arose. There would be no requirement to obtain the permission of a local government council and the Department of Urban Affairs and Planning.

The Railway Construction Act would not operate once a railway line had been constructed and the type of development that would occur along the route of a new railway line would be governed by existing procedures. This would not avoid the need to conduct an Environmental Impact Statement into the construction of a new railway line. The new act would require the Department of Railways to engage in the same EIS process that currently exists. Once the new railway was constructed, the Department of Urban Affairs and Planning would resume its function in determining the style of development that was to occur along the new rail corridor.

Railway lines would be built in such a way so as to reduce to a minimum the number of homes that would be affected. As the issue of noise along the Southern railway line at Casula is affecting residents it is not unreasonable for noise barriers to be built at the area of greatest concern. This is an issue for the New South Wales Government to address because they alone own the Southern line.

Had the Department of Planning existed in 1855 our state may never have got a railway to Casula. Not only is it time that Railway line planning is separated from urban planning, a Minister for Railways in addition to a Minister for Transport is needed to balance the argument and provide the people of New South Wales with choice that on the surface is provided but in reality it is not.

Country Link needs a boost: Australia is large enough to handle it.

Victor P Taffa

When Former Prime Minister Bob Hawke announced in 1984 that there would not be a Very Fast Train (VFT) to Canberra and Melbourne, Goulburn lost the chance to advance and grow and in the intervening years has the Southern Highlands prospered?

One local said to me on my recent visit to Goulburn from Sydney “Goulburn is no longer a railway town.” My thoughts were that this was a sad comment. Auburn Street had the through traffic removed with the construction of the By-Pass however our railways are left in the steam age.

Many may say ‘so what’ with respect to our railways. I believe that not only is it time that Railway line planning was separated from urban planning and that there be a Minister for Railways in addition to a Minister for Transport.

How many single lane roads exist? How many single lane railway lines exist? The answer to the first question is none and the answer to the second question is too many to name.

At both Campbelltown and Sydney Central Stations there are signs advising passengers regarding the short platforms. Even Campbelltown Station has only 3½ Platforms.

Railway electrification it seems exists only for Metropolitan Sydney. After I left Goulburn I proceeded onto Cooma to stay with my Aunt. The railway to Cooma was closed many years ago. With Oil a finite resource we all whinge every time the price increases. Isn’t it time that the VFT was renewed as a serious transport option?

The Southern line should be duplicated and electrified. The stations with short platforms should be full length and the Southern line should continue from Canberra to Albury.

If Queensland can have an elevated railway to its airport and a tilt train then why can’t New South Wales have a VFT to operate on a dual track line through Goulburn? Not only would a VFT provide an economic boom for Goulburn but the Southern Highlands would have a tourism boom and commuting times to Sydney would be slashed.

What is needed to balance the ledger is to provide the people of New South Wales with choice that on the surface is provided but in reality it is not when it comes to transport.

When the Brisbane-Sydney XPT takes 16½ hours without any delays in arriving at Roma Street with an XPT fleet that has only 8 sleeper cars and while at Coffs Harbour the train had to stop North of Taree because of a bumpy level crossing where a truck had lost its load and was lying on the tracks, rail travel should be a viable option in a country as large as Australia.

Rail travel should not be an afterthought that has been left stuck in the 19^th century.

Campbelltown Short Platform 4 Moss Vale service

The Lower Hunter Save Our Rail branch

Meets on a monthly basis at the Newcastle Leagues Club.

The Newcastle Leagues Club is located at

17 National Park Street, Newcastle West New South Wales.

The meetings commence at 5.30 pm and are generally

Held in the second floor function room.

Meetings are held on the first Tuesday of the month.

Please call Joan Dawson, Branch President

On (02) 4928 1339 or 0408 618 198

Everyone is very welcome to attend.

Save Our Rail Posters