CCT Dog

Sydney's Cross City Tunnel deal is a dog. The public knows it, the Government knows it, as does the private consortium operater.

One Minister has been questioned in recent months by the Independent Commission Against Corruption. There are allegations he released confidential documents to the project consortium during the tender stage. ICAC is yet to rule on the matter.

Now comes an early report from a Government inquiry into the fiasco,

THE former Carr cabinet and the Roads and Traffic Authority receive stinging criticism from State Parliament's select committee investigating the Cross City Tunnel shambles.

The report is a slap-down former Premier Bob Carr's and his Cabinet Members who were up-to-their-neck in the project's approval. A slap-down from a Labor-dominated inquiry,

But MPs on the select committee have concluded that management of the Cross City Tunnel project was, if not a shambles, less than well handled.

While Mr Carr, ex-ministers and RTA bosses lauded the "up-front fee" of $96 million paid by the tunnel builders, the committee recommends that charging up-front fees be abandoned on all future projects.

Why would the Government of Australia's richest state be excited by an up-front fee ? Because their/our finances are a mess,

The committee has been persuaded by evidence that the RTA grabbed the up-front fee because it was in budget difficulties. But the payment was misguided because it led to a much higher toll for motorists plus more road closures to funnel traffic into the tunnel.

Which raises a fundamental question - to whom is the Road and Traffic Authority's(RTA) first obligation, the public or a private consortium ? From a submission tabled to the inquiry it would appear the RTA played favourites, at the public's expense.

John Oulsen was a member of a Community Liasion Group, established in accordance with the Conditions of Approval for the Tunnel's development. Oulsen wasn't impressed with the role of the RTA,

By becoming a proponent of the scheme the RTA are too concerned with protecting their own interests and those of the private  consortium, particularly where their funding is linked with use and traffic calculations become commercial in confidence. The quality of the design, consideration of traffic impacts outside of the project zone and the safety of the road is inevitably compromised.

As everyone knows, the CCT deal is a dog. All that remains is the burial service. 

Comments

[Fabian]

This is but one example of what happens when you let Treasury run the State. Our enfeebled public transport system, leaky water pipes and under-funded health and education services are others.

But hey, NSW has a AAA credit rating - hooray!!!

[Another Adrian]

As a taxi driver, how many trips a week would you have done down the CCT, Adrian? I'm interested to know how your current usage of the tunnel compares to some of our other toll roads just after they opened. Is the tunnel really much worse than, say, the early days of the Eastern Distributer of the M2, or do all our toll roads start off horribly slow, then start making heaps of money for their private owners?

[stackja1945]

Dog bites Carr?

[adrian]

AA, the only time I use the tunnel on a regular basis is fares from the Eastern Suburbs to the North Shore. It's twice as quick and also cheaper, including the reduced toll of $1.68.

Thrice I've used it from the Western Suburbs to the Airport or Moore Park. Only because the passengers were willingly to fork out the $3.56 toll.

But generally I almost never use it in the cab. I'd use it more in my own vehicle when travelling across town, but not both ways.

Other tollroads provided an obvious advantage from the outset, even if drivers were reluctant to admit it. In particular the Eastern Distributor copped massive resistance during construction from Surry Hills residents. However once it opened they soon realised their neighbourhood traffic was drastically reduced. Unlike the CCT effects on Wooloomoloo residents. The inane road diversions ensure their ongoing pain.

Formine, the CCT is fatally flawed due it being predicated on a theory. It seems the projected flows were estimated without regard to existing cross-city traffic patterns. Underwhelming patronage during the no-toll period would support this.