Why is public transportation in Australia bad?

sptrawler said:

This is why smurph and others say, some things should remain public utilities.

To put them in private hands, has to end up with a reduced service or an increased cost.

Click to expand...

A real example that used to happen here in Hobart with most of the city having a public (government run) bus service whilst part of it was served by a privately owned company.

As a teenager I lived in an area served by the private company. Bottom line - doing night school (TAFE) I caught the public (government) bus that went closest to where I lived then walked the last 6km. Private buses stopped at 7:30pm, government ones kept running until close to midnight.

There's no money to be made running buses after the peak commuting times, hence the private company didn't do so. In contrast a publicly owned service has a broader objective that doesn't involve making a profit, it exists to provide transport to those who need it, so they run a lot more services.

The downside to providing an extensive service is, of course, cost. It's no secret that Metro (government owned) loses a lot of money in order to provide bus services. But to be fair, that loss is largely because 80% of the people riding on buses aren't paying full fare, they are students, pensioners, unemployed and so on eligible for a concession.

So it basically comes down to welfare provision. Commuter services for city workers make a profit since just about everyone on board would be paying full fare and the buses would normally be quite full. But other services are either running late at night with very few people on board or are primarily used by those who don't pay full fare. As such they lose money. But from a broader social perspective, I'd argue that there's a need to provide services of an evening, weekends and so on even if they aren't profitable. Hence public ownership rather than private makes sense given that making a profit is not the intent.

sptrawler said:

This is why smurph and others say, some things should remain public utilities.
They provide an essential service, that due to consumer demand is required to be over serviced, therefore are not financially viable.
To put them in private hands, has to end up with a reduced service or an increased cost.

Click to expand...

The classic case now is Australia Post.

If it was privatised, services in rural areas where I live would deteriorate markedly. Thankfully the govt has decided not to sell it, at the moment at least. Their parcel delivery service has saved it from the reduction in demand for letter delivery.

Smurf1976 said:

The downside to providing an extensive service is, of course, cost. It's no secret that Metro (government owned) loses a lot of money in order to provide bus services. But to be fair, that loss is largely because 80% of the people riding on buses aren't paying full fare, they are students, pensioners, unemployed and so on eligible for a concession.

So it basically comes down to welfare provision. Commuter services for city workers make a profit since just about everyone on board would be paying full fare and the buses would normally be quite full. But other services are either running late at night with very few people on board or are primarily used by those who don't pay full fare. As such they lose money. But from a broader social perspective, I'd argue that there's a need to provide services of an evening, weekends and so on even if they aren't profitable. Hence public ownership rather than private makes sense given that making a profit is not the intent.

Click to expand...

This is why we are at the impasse structurally, we all want services, but trying to make them sustainable is difficult. The ones who use it, don't want to pay any more for it. Therefore you have to tax the ones who don't use it, in order to supply it.

Buses services are a perfect example, you have to keep lifting the non concession charges.
Which discourages full paying passengers from using the service.
I know in my case, if both my wife and I are going somewhere it is cheaper to take the car, be that into the city, 60k's to Mandurah or 600K's to Kalgoorlie.

We are definitely at a point fiscally in Australia, where our taxes are going to have to go a lot higher, to supply our current level of welfare.
The problem with that is it just puts the price of something else up.

Shinjuku Station in Tokyo had 3.64 million passengers a day back in 2007. Not much off the population of Sydney for back then. In 2010 the total trips taken on the Sydney network was just 522 million; the breakdown by mode was as follows:
State Transit (buses) 205,000,000
City Rail (commuter trains) 303,000,000
Sydney Ferries 14,000,000

Sydney Trains & NSW Trains, for example, operates 1,650 train cars on 1,595 km of track serving 307 stations. State Transit operates 2,163 buses on 284 routes in Sydney and a further 26 routes in Newcastle, a city of 540,000. Those figures are higher than most countries, yet is funded by a relatively small population.

Wages are in some ways higher for staff here compared to say the USA or Asia - though I wouldn't say they're particularity generous when you compare to the cost of living here.

You then need to compare to a lot of other countries to see we're not too badly off. I won't say the public transport in Sydney is great, but it's reasonably reliable, though fairly expensive if you are only doing short trips. There needs to be better intermodal fares, similar to say Singapore, so that passengers are forced to take one type of transport because to change to a more convenient option will increase the cost.

Our overpriced land in cities also makes providing new public transport options very expensive as well.

Smurf1976 said:

So it basically comes down to welfare provision. Commuter services for city workers make a profit since just about everyone on board would be paying full fare and the buses would normally be quite full. But other services are either running late at night with very few people on board or are primarily used by those who don't pay full fare. As such they lose money. But from a broader social perspective, I'd argue that there's a need to provide services of an evening, weekends and so on even if they aren't profitable. Hence public ownership rather than private makes sense given that making a profit is not the intent.

Click to expand...

Only have to look at the pensioner discount fares in NSW:

In NSW, pensioners have access to various entitlements but some fare products are restricted to those from particular States and Territories, and to certain services:

Half fare concessions on NSW TrainLink Regional services and Great Southern Rail services.
The $2.50 Country Pensioner Excursion (CPE) fare on booked NSW TrainLink Regional services provided entirely outside of the MyZone ticketing system area bounded by Dungog/Scone, Bomaderry (Nowra), Goulburn and Lithgow (only available to NSW/ACT/VIC card holders).
Free travel: NSW/ACT Pensioner Concession Card holders entitled to a combined total of four single or two return free journeys on NSW TrainLink Regional services or Great Southern Rail services within NSW each calendar year (booking fees apply with NSW Trains for First Class Travel). Card holders from other Australian states and territories are entitled to a half fare.
Certain free travel entitlements provided under arrangements with the Victorian and Queensland Governments.

While it does encourage the elderly to get out and about, the cost is being supported by fewer taxpayers, similar to the issues around the pension.

I think the new Opal ticketing system here is going to see a massive boom in revenue for public transport though, since they're getting rid of all the long dated tickets which provided very good value if you could afford the initial high upfront price. Now travellers are faced with buying weekly paper tickets that end up roughly 30% more expensive than a similar quarterly ticket, or move to Opal but face increased costs unless they're a high user of public transport, and wont be able to change mode of transport unless they're willing to accept paying more as well. It will become a significant issue around the next election because by then pretty much everyone who used the long dated tickets will have finally been forced onto a far more expensive option.

Had the pleasure of taking Brisbanes river cat ferries today from Hawthorne to southland and back again....what an awesome experience. It's like, less than $10 for two people one way. A nice 30 minute cruise. Spotlessly clean and fast, these things are the way to go. The whole time on southbank I'm thinking this is the best place in the world!

Middle of winter, 21c and bright blue sky's.....I love Queensland!