Tuesday 30th of April 2024
Home » Blogs » Gus Leonisky's blog

on the buses...

gladys

Efficiency means job losses, Opposition says

Shadow Treasurer Michael Daley said New South Wales should be concerned by the Government's plan.

"When Liberal governments talk about making things more efficient they just mean sacking people and cutting services," he said.

But the Treasurer said the plan was about "more than simply saving money".

In the speech Ms Berejiklian cited her work as Transport Minister.

"One of my priorities was reforming the bureaucracy that delivers transport in NSW," the speech read.

"When I left the Transport portfolio, there were 2,000 fewer back-office staff in Sydney Trains and NSW Trains than there were in RailCorp when I arrived.

"At the same time, there were well over 1,100 extra services and customer satisfaction had increased."

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2016-02-29/nsw-government-considers-reducing-public-service-organisations/7206864

 

Not to mention that the transport "efficiency" in Sydney was more or less planned by the previous Labor government, including the introduction of the Metro Buses and MOST of the ironing out of the Opal card system, which Gladys made a small mess of, thereafter by making concessions that people took her word for it.

Customer satisfaction?... A couple of big words, especially since the crackdown on short trips that made long trips more cheap or free... As well the State wants to "sell the bus network" for $500 millions and is prepared to fork out $2 billions for a lousy Tram service that not only is destroying old trees , will be AS SLOW AS 1927,  since trams can't overtake each others — while buses can.

 

 

best value for tax payer is euphemism for slave labour...

 

Placing Sydney's entire bus network in the hands of private operators could result in almost $500 million in savings over five years, a report commissioned by a transport lobby group estimates.

A renewed push from the Tourism and Transport Forum for private firms to expand their reach comes weeks after the acting Auditor-General found the privatisation of Sydney's ferries was justified, pointing to about $100 million in savings since 2012.

In releasing the latest report, the forum's chief executive, Margy Osmond, said it made the case clear that private operators should be given the opportunity to competitively bid for the four contracts held by government-owned Sydney Buses.

"Our analysis indicates that there is the potential for up to half a billion dollars in savings over five years if Sydney Buses was run by a private operator," she said.

However, the Bus, Rail and Tram Union, which represents thousands of drivers, said TTF had been calling for Sydney Buses to be franchised for years. 

"No matter what the government or the transport forum call it, this is privatisation," the secretary of the union's bus division, Chris Preston, said.

"The government is trying to sell off Newcastle Buses, and they will hide behind this report to privatise Sydney Buses by stealth next."

In November, the Baird government unveiled plans to put into private hands the operation of Newcastle's buses, ferries and light rail service after it is built.

TTF also cited the report by consulting firm LEK as evidence of the need to privatise government-run bus services in Canberra, Brisbane and Hobart.

While private companies such as Hillsbus and Transdev operate bus services in Sydney, state-owned Sydney Buses still carries the majority of the city's passengers.

Ms Osmond said franchising was a "great model" because it kept the infrastructure such as buses and depots in public hands while contracting out their operation. 

"The management of bus networks is an area of transport policy in which the private sector has proven again and again that it can deliver quality services at best value for taxpayers' money," she said.


Read more: http://www.smh.com.au/nsw/privatising-entire-sydney-bus-network-a-500m-game-changer-report-20160226-gn4ngd.html#ixzz41WMqMbOd
Follow us: @smh on Twitter | sydneymorningherald on Facebook

 

shifting public assets into private accounts by stealth...

 

Urban Growth driven by dollars not easing inequality

The failure of Urban Growth to include any affordable housing in the first stage of the North Eveleigh project is sadly very familiar ("No affordable housing in new towers", March 26-27.) The same appalling results are true of proposed urban renewal projects in North Parramatta (the former Cumberland Hospital) and the Bays Precinct.Only 10 years ago, Landcom, the predecessor of Urban Growth, operated in the housing supply market to give modest income potential home owners a chance.Similar government development agencies in the UK and the US are today lauded about their achievements in generating affordable and social housing close to jobs, transport and services in their cities.Urban Growth's real mission appears to simply be to maximise development benefits to the NSW Treasury coffers and accelerate the removal of low income households from many parts of Greater Sydney.

Gary Moore Leichhardt

The discovery that (shock, horror!) there will be no "affordable" housing in the North Eveleigh project should be greeted with relief. The construction of "affordable " housing by the Government is a futile exercise that will always fall short of demand and that carries with it so many undesirable side-effects. What is needed is to focus on families in need, by providing social supports (subsidies) that will allow them to compete effectively in the housing market. We have made a national policy decision to rely on private enterprise to provide shelter. We subsidise many other life elements for the poor, so why not housing - one of the most essential.

Bruce Hyland Woy Woy


Read more: http://www.smh.com.au/comment/smh-letters/education-in-australia-a-race-to-the-finnish-20160326-gnrq2s.html#ixzz448V5wXh6
Follow us: @smh on Twitter | sydneymorningherald on Facebook

What is not seen here is that UrbanGrowth has been designed by the Baird Government as a "Corporation" to shift (STEAL) public lands and give them to developers. It is a neat trick. It's done undercover and behind close doors. And no one knows the deals made, because of "in confidence" or "commercial" contract... The amount of the lands being flogged to developers this way is MASSIVE and no government will be able to get anything back... Suddenly, you wonder how a 30 storey hotel can be plonked in the middle of Darling Harbour for example... Vistas are being lost and exquisite Chinese gardens are loosing their sun...