Like what you've read?

On Line Opinion is the only Australian site where you get all sides of the story. We don't
charge, but we need your support. Here�s how you can help.

  • Advertise

    We have a monthly audience of 70,000 and advertising packages from $200 a month.

  • Volunteer

    We always need commissioning editors and sub-editors.

  • Contribute

    Got something to say? Submit an essay.


 The National Forum   Donate   Your Account   On Line Opinion   Forum   Blogs   Polling   About   
On Line Opinion logo ON LINE OPINION - Australia's e-journal of social and political debate

Subscribe!
Subscribe





On Line Opinion is a not-for-profit publication and relies on the generosity of its sponsors, editors and contributors. If you would like to help, contact us.
___________

Syndicate
RSS/XML


RSS 2.0

Politicians fiddle over ports, roads, rail, power and gas

By Rod Sims - posted Monday, 3 October 2005


The infrastructure debate started in promising fashion. Pushed along by the queues of ships waiting to load coal at Queensland's Dalrymple Bay port, the debate sought to address two questions.

First, is Australia's existing infrastructure - ports, roads, rail, electricity and gas facilities and rivers and dams - capable of coping with high economic growth without running into bottlenecks?

Second, and most important, would further reform of the policy and planning processes for infrastructure boost the nation's productivity?

Advertisement

They remain the right questions. In the past few months, however, the debate has become sidetracked by two issues.

First, various governments have maintained that our infrastructure has not reached a crisis point. It is as if we can pay serious attention to the nation's infrastructure only if it stumbles on this high hurdle. Many of our cities are imposing water restrictions to conserve limited water supplies. Most of our cities face growing traffic jams. Many of our rail lines, so important to moving freight, are in poor condition. Our rivers and groundwater systems are under great stress. And official reports have identified many impediments to investment in our electricity and gas sectors.

We can all have views on this state of affairs which, if not a crisis, at least should be a source of serious concern. Many Australians, including former NSW premier Bob Carr, believe these problems require us to limit Australia's population and economic growth.

Second, the debate is being increasingly dominated by the voices of government regulators and those infrastructure providers that they regulate. The regulators and the owners of powerlines and gas pipelines and even Telstra have much to dispute. Regulatory rulings can determine what profits are made from the businesses and what customers pay. The regulators and the regulated would not be doing their job if they did not argue strongly and loudly.

However, there are many more issues than the debate over how to set the regulated prices that infrastructure owners can charge. The serious risk is that the infrastructure debate will be left to the regulators and those they regulate. If this happens, the infrastructure problems facing Australia will not be fixed.

Indeed, the problems facing our land transport and electricity sectors, and in our urban and rural water supplies need to be addressed through the actions of the Council of Australian Governments.

Advertisement

In land transport, governments need to stop favouring large trucks over trains to carry freight and get rid of state differences that get in the way of a national freight market. Only governments can create the environment in which we can improve public transport. And only governments can tackle urban road congestion by charging for using the city roads rather than relying on motorists to vary their travel plans to avoid traffic jams.

In electricity, we need action from governments to overcome the impediments that are discouraging the investment needed in our transmission system and to encourage a well-functioning financial market for inter-state trading. And only governments can rationalise their own disparate and confusing policies for curbing greenhouse gas emissions.

For water, it is governments that must provide the environment to facilitate the investment needed to make sure our cities continue to be supplied. It is governments that can see to it that urban water prices reflect the scarcity value of water. And, outside the cities, only governments can set and meet clear targets for high reliability in all of our irrigation areas.

Across all sectors, various government planning processes need to become better integrated. Commonwealth and state funding and other responsibilities overlap in ways that can inhibit sound urban and broader infrastructure development.

COAG is the natural forum for these issues. They cross state boundaries or are problems common to all of our cities. In our federated system of multiple decision-makers, these issues will not be advanced unless they are dealt with and monitored at the highest level.

Governments should not wait to be confronted by a crisis before they act on issues that otherwise limit Australia's growth. And they should not be too distracted by the fallout from the determinations of regulators that affect the profits of specific companies.

The wider Australian community has a key stake in this debate. While its voice may not be as strident on any particular issue, it should be what governments respond to.

  1. Pages:
  2. 1
  3. 2
  4. All

First published in The Australian on September 27, 2005.



Discuss in our Forums

See what other readers are saying about this article!

Click here to read & post comments.

5 posts so far.

Share this:
reddit this reddit thisbookmark with del.icio.us Del.icio.usdigg thisseed newsvineSeed NewsvineStumbleUpon StumbleUponsubmit to propellerkwoff it

About the Author

Rod Sims is a director of Port Jackson Partners Limited and a commissioner on the National Competition Council. He wrote Reforming and Restoring Australia's Infrastructure for the Business Council of Australia.

Creative Commons LicenseThis work is licensed under a Creative Commons License.

Article Tools
Comment 5 comments
Print Printable version
Subscribe Subscribe
Email Email a friend
Advertisement

About Us Search Discuss Feedback Legals Privacy