<html><body>
GUEST OBSERVATION
The Abbott government is preparing to give Sydney’s WestConnex road project a <a href="https://news.smh.com.au/breaking-news-national/westconnex-to-get-2bn-in-budget-20140508-37wzp" target="_blank">A$2 billion boost</a> in this week’s federal budget, part of a broader $10 billion <a href="https://www.propertyobserver.com.au/https://www.abc.net.au/news/2014-05-08/government-to-detail-road-funding-and-detention-centre-closures/5437748" target="_blank">infrastructure package</a> aimed at boosting productivity and private sector investment.
Congestion in Sydney continues to escalate with gridlock on roads impacting passenger and freight logistics. The persistence of this situation reflects poorly on project selection and asset management processes, along with distortions that have arisen from poor interactions between the Commonwealth and the states.
Reform is urgently needed where there is less focus on ribbon cutting and more use of well-targeted “pinch point” interventions.
For example, removing congestion and bottlenecks from existing infrastructure along with shifting a small amount of demand from the peak to the shoulder period can often have superior productivity impacts compared with building expensive greenfield assets.
The school holiday effect on roads is an example of this point, when there are better traffic flows when less than 5% of traffic is absent in the peak. Surely there must be a way to win the community’s confidence that we can make the peak hour work better by shaping demand through means other than just pricing. Changing school opening times and retail operating hours could be a starting point.
Thinking beyond roads
While NSW has a strong case to build more new infrastructure like WestConnex and North Connex; it must use these once in a lifetime opportunities to do much more than build a new road.
The reality is the Sydney of today and yesterday is simply too “land hungry” to be sustainable into the 22nd century.
The appetite for land, unchecked with proper pricing signals for the provision of infrastructure has seen an un-virtuous cycle demanding ever more capital and diminishing return.
Many Sydney-siders have sought relief from escalating land prices on the city fringes, and have done so without the benefit of any genuine choice on where else they could live. Spacious residences on the fringe compare poorly in their mind to the expensive “compact” living of the inner areas.
Important projects like WestConnex can be a catalyst for triggering a new wave of innovative investment, that is, if we consider WestConnex the road project and WestConnex the urban revitalisation project.
A critical question that needs to be answered is how much extra housing and urban revitalising can and should we expect from WestConnex?
Despite the best intentions of those tasked with delivering WestConnex the public documentation suggests that the A$11.5 billion price tag will only deliver 25,000 new strategically located residences for Sydney over 20 years.
Sydney requires at least 800,000 new residences by 2050.
Given that WestConnex is developing such a valuable artery for the city, can it do more?
The first step will require governance model that breaks down traditional administrative silos and enables integrated land use and transport planning to occur.
Productivity matters
The objective of lifting state productivity has been missing from project planning in the past, making it difficult for governments to be purposeful and consistent in their infrastructure decisions in recent decades.
To accommodate the extra three million people by mid-century in NSW, the stock of transport infrastructure will need to either expand by 60% or its productivity must lift by a similar magnitude.
Obviously, it will be some combination of the two.
But anyone flying into Sydney can see that there is not a lot of room for new roads and rail systems. So productivity is going to matter a great deal.
To that end the regulatory system requires reform, as it must provide the right price signals and incentives to make the best use of existing infrastructure. This means a willingness to allow prices to reflect full cost recovery for the infrastructure provided.
Tolls are an option, but a toll should always be a fee for a defined level of service, and the community has the right to expect choice in the services available. The problem is that infrastructure often fails this test to the detriment of business and community confidence.
Tolls need to be justified
It is notable that the M1, M2, M4 and M5 toll roads in Sydney all originally demonstrated great benefit to commuters with faster travel time. But the reality is that now each of these toll roads has a peak hour exceeding 10 hours per day; slow speed and uncertain travel time is the norm.
To address this situation, state and federal infrastructure agencies need to enshrine customer service benchmarks that govern lifetime performance of major assets and networks. Government and the private sector concession holders will then require a framework to sustain them together.
Citizens living in our global cities expect globally competitive transit times during the peak hour. But the reality is Sydney has an average commute speed in peak hour that is 17% lower than London, at just 50km/h, and Melbourne is only marginally better.
Given Sydney and Melbourne are small cities by comparison to London, this is a concerning signal about the health of the road transport system.
Using tolls to help fund transport infrastructure is reasonable but without service benchmarks such as minimum speed guarantees in the peak then commuters are not assured of value for money; a toll becomes just another tax.
Tolls and user charges are not a panacea without fundamental institutional reform. Infrastructure must perform a service to the community that is relevant and compelling in order to justify a user charge in the first place. This is one of the missing ingredients to a successful infrastructure future.
Garry Bowditch is CEO, SMART Infrastructure Facility at University of Wollongong.
Garry Bowditch does not work for, consult to, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has no relevant affiliations.
This article was originally published on <a href="https://theconversation.com" target="_blank">The Conversation</a>.
</body></html>

gbowditch-XhQ427ncp8

The budget will be big on infrastructure, but we need more than just roads

<html><body>
Australia spends more on infrastructure today than at any stage in its history. Yet governments are unable to meet demand and don’t expect ever to do so. What can governments do to keep up with escalating demand and community expectations for infrastructure?
Reserve Bank assistant governor Philip Lowe <a href="https://www.businessspectator.com.au/news/2013/11/26/infrastructure/rbas-lowe-urges-tolls-infrastructure" target="_blank">says</a> tolls and levies could be the answer to more efficiently funding the transport infrastructure we need - infrastructure he says would boost productivity and improve living standards.
Tolls are just one issue likely to be debated as part of the Productivity Commission’s current <a href="https://www.pm.gov.au/media/2013-11-13/productivity-commission-inquiry-infrastructure-costs" target="_blank">inquiry</a> into infrastructure costs, which is considering how infrastructure is funded and financed by both the Commonwealth and the states.
Governments trying to fix the infrastructure backlog face a number of constraints including money, suitable land access and community buy-in.
Historically, Australia is a large investor in infrastructure with per capita spending of about $18,500 per annum in the past decade. This means the nation has pulled ahead of the OECD, reflecting two mining booms and nation building public spending.
Gridlock frustrates
At the same time congestion in Australia’s major cities continues to escalate with gridlock on roads impacting passenger and freight logistics. This situation reflects poorly on project selection processes and willingness to choose infrastructure that lifts national productivity. For example, renovating existing infrastructure and shifting demand from the peak to the shoulder period can often have superior productivity impacts compared with building greenfield assets.
While Australia has a strong case to build more infrastructure, it must do so with a great deal more discipline and clear purpose towards the long term national interest.
Prioritising projects with the highest cost benefit ratios is fundamental. At the same time we must recognise that Australia has erred on this front, which has come at a cost to the public. These projects are typically in the category “too much, too late,” such as gold plating electricity distribution networks on the east coast and the south-east Queensland water grid.
If more road and public transport investment is to occur, governments should also focus on how they will service private capital during the long period of investment in infrastructure. This means a willingness to allow prices to reflect full cost recovery for the infrastructure provided, permit prices to reflect the incentive to invest and where appropriate use the government’s balance sheet to fund shadow tolls where a user charge is not appropriate.
Productivity matters
Better infrastructure for Australia should be anchored by a clear objective of lifting national productivity. This clarity of objective has been missing which has made it difficult for governments to be purposeful and consistent in their infrastructure decisions.
To that end the regulatory system requires reform, as it must provide the right price signals and incentives to make the best use of existing infrastructure. Tolls and user charges can have a more fundamental role to play in shaping demand and helping to direct where investment is needed to lift productivity growth.
Of course a toll should always be a fee for a defined level of service, and the community has the right to expect choice in the services available. The problem is that infrastructure often fails this test to the detriment of business and the community.
Tolls need to be justified
It is notable that the M1, M2, M4 and M5 toll roads in Sydney all originally demonstrated great benefit to commuters with faster travel time. But the reality is that now each of these toll roads has a peak hour exceeding 10 hours per day; slow speed and uncertain travel time is the norm.
To address this situation, state and federal infrastructure agencies need to enshrine customer service benchmarks that govern lifetime performance of major assets and networks. Government and the private sector concession holders will then require a framework to sustain them together.
The Australian community expects globally competitive transit times during the peak hour. Using tolls to help fund transport infrastructure is reasonable but without service benchmarks commuters are not assured of value for money; a toll becomes just another tax.
Tolls and user charges are not a panacea without fundamental institutional reform. Infrastructure must perform a service to the community that is relevant and compelling in order to justify a user charge in the first place. This is one of the missing ingredients to a better infrastructure future for Australia.

<hr>
Garry Bowditch is CEO of the <a rel="nofollow" href="https://smart.uow.edu.au/index" target="_blank">SMART Infrastructure Facility</a> at the University of Wollongong, which has been funded by the NSW and Queensland state governments to conduct research into infrastructure costs.
This article was originally published at <a href="https://theconversation.com" target="_blank">The Conversation</a>. Read the <a href="https://theconversation.com/should-users-pay-the-toll-for-australias-infrastructure-problem-20774" target="_blank">original article</a>.
 
 
<img width="1" height="1" alt="The Conversation" src="https://counter.theconversation.edu.au/content/20774/count.gif">
</body></html>

We need to fix our national infrastructure problem, but who's going to pay for it?

<html><body>
Infrastructure is about the long-term growth and prosperity of a nation, but Australia will get very little of this benefit if the cost of building it continues to rapidly escalate.
Australia is becoming increasingly uncompetitive in design and delivery of major projects. This is an unacceptable situation, and a newly commissioned multi-state inquiry by the SMART Infrastructure Facility will identify the key causes and make recommendations to help secure better value for taxpayers’ money.
Australian jurisdictions have experienced sharp rises in the cost of delivering mega-projects. In the pre-GFC mining construction boom period of the mid-2000s construction costs were 20-30% higher than previous levels. Infrastructure projects continue to get larger and, therefore, more risky, so relatively small percentage increases in design and construction costs translate into very large dollar costs.
Certainly the pre- and post-GFC resources booms put upward pressure on scarce labour, equipment and raw materials but this does not appear to explain the full extent of the cost inflation. Put another way, some of the increases in the cost of large projects during the boom years has persisted and seems permanent.
The Business Council of Australia is concerned about Australia’s attractiveness to invest. Australia’s hospitals are 62% more expensive to build, shopping centres 43% and schools 26% than OECD peers. Australia’s onshore resource projects are 40% more expensive than the US Gulf Coast and offshore projects are 200% more expensive.
A big challenge has been Australia’s near 20-year super investment cycle. This created the perfect storm with mining booms I and II coincided with an asset renewal mega-cycle in electricity as well as billions in new investment in water security in south east Queensland and other parts of Australia struggling with the threat of drought. The result was escalating design, engineering, construction, raw materials and equipment costs.
Investment in transport, electricity, gas and water has grown above trend over the past decade. This may have reflected a catch up from under investment in earlier decades, as well as poor regulatory incentives to over build.
Hidden drivers, massive cost
Many of the cost drivers are hidden, at times subtle and small but cumulatively can be very significant on project costs. These include changes to technical standards (over-engineering), environmental and planning requirements, safety standards and treatment of contingencies in contracts. Quality of project delivery teams and particularly project directors is likely to be very important as well.
The Queensland and NSW governments have sponsored the Cost of Infrastructure Project at the SMART Infrastructure Facility, University of Wollongong. They realise the importance of getting on the front foot to, first, understand the drivers of rising infrastructure costs in roads and rail projects, particularly for ‘mega-projects’ and, second, to better control costs so that taxpayers are more likely to receive better value for money.
High and uncertain costs are also very relevant to the incentives for private investment in public infrastructure. For instance, it is difficult enough for prospective private investors to manage green-field and patronage risk with new assets such as toll roads and renewable energy projects. But when we add to that a risk premium for rising project construction costs, it is difficult for mega-projects to pass stringent commercial testing.
Arresting the loss of long term planning is critical to lower infrastructure costs. All jurisdictions face extreme scarcity of available land, especially separated transport corridors for freight and passengers in already built-up areas. As demonstrated recently with the Southern Sydney Freight Line, right of way to passenger services impacts design, longer delivery time and much higher capital and labour costs.
More generally, the lack of land-use planning in cities has required expensive tunnels when surface access would have been cheaper. Environmental regulation further exacerbates costs without a proper evaluation of benefits.
Rushing in the wrong direction
Urgency has played an unnecessarily big role in Australia resulting in the wrong assets being built. The Brisbane Western Corridor Recycled Water Pipeline is a case in point. Before the situation became potentially catastrophic, long term planning with the community on the merits of water recycling could have been a far cheaper way of securing water security.
Finally, an institutional mind shift is required where infrastructure should not be just a counter cyclical economic policy past time. The infrastructure industry does not function well as a ‘short-order’ cook. It needs greater certainty with projects that will come to market over 10 to 15 years. This will provide a better environment for investment in capabilities to drive innovation, streamline delivery, purchase productivity-enhancing equipment and invest in highly trained personnel.
 
<hr>
 Garry Bowditch is CEO of the <a target="_blank" href="https://smart.uow.edu.au/index">SMART Infrastructure Facility</a> at the University of Wollongong, which has been funded by the NSW and Queensland state governments to conduct research into infrastructure costs.
The SMART Infrastructure Facility will report on the cost of infrastructure inquiry in first half of 2014.
This article was originally published at <a href="https://theconversation.com">The Conversation</a>.
 
<img alt="The Conversation" height="1" src="https://counter.theconversation.edu.au/content/19037/count.gif" width="1">
</body></html>

Garry Bowditch

Editor's Picks

Have something to contribute?

The latest real estate & off the plan properties & news, delivered to your inbox.

Developments

New apartments

New townhouses

News

The latest real estate & off the plan properties & news, delivered to your inbox.

Garry Bowditch

Editor's Picks

Receive the latest news stories to your inbox

Have something to contribute?

The latest real estate & off the plan properties & news, delivered to your inbox.

Developments

New apartments

New townhouses

News

The latest real estate & off the plan properties & news, delivered to your inbox.