Change of Transport Minister

Sydney / New South Wales Transport Discussion
User avatar
boronia
Posts: 21567
Joined: Sat Mar 06, 2004 6:18 am
Favourite Vehicle: Ahrens Fox; GMC PD4107
Location: Sydney NSW

Change of Transport Minister

Post by boronia »

Andrew Constance set to resign from NSW parliament for federal tilt

It has been speculated on for a couple of years now

https://www.smh.com.au/national/nsw/and ... 58wqo.html
Preserving fire service history
@ The Museum of Fire.
tonyp
Posts: 12348
Joined: Tue Nov 28, 2006 2:31 am

Imminent change of Minister

Post by tonyp »

Constance is resigning, apparently interested in contesting Federal seat of Gilmore. I guess we'll find out who the new Minister is Tuesday or so.
User avatar
Fleet Lists
Administrator
Posts: 23803
Joined: Sat Mar 06, 2004 12:49 pm
Location: The Shire

Re: Imminent change of Minister

Post by Fleet Lists »

It is interesting that both transport ministers since the Libs got into power in 2011 will be out of parliament in the space of a couple of days. Contance will make his announcement at 1pm today.
Living in the Shire.
User avatar
Swift
Posts: 13247
Joined: Sat Mar 06, 2004 1:23 pm
Favourite Vehicle: Porshe 911 Carerra
Location: Ettalong- the world capital of 0405s.

Re: Political discussion

Post by Swift »

Modern day Laurie Brereton.
NSW, the state that embraces mediocrity.
User avatar
Fleet Lists
Administrator
Posts: 23803
Joined: Sat Mar 06, 2004 12:49 pm
Location: The Shire

Re: Imminent Change of Minister

Post by Fleet Lists »

More like Bruce Baird.
Living in the Shire.
tonyp
Posts: 12348
Joined: Tue Nov 28, 2006 2:31 am

Re: Imminent Change of Minister

Post by tonyp »

Can't think what Bruce Baird achieved, though much of the transport planning that following Labor governments imperfectly acted upon commenced during that previous Liberal government.

I would compare Berejiklian and Constance to neither of the above as Transport Ministers. Looking back over the last century, Berejiklian was clearly the standout driving force behind the greatest investment in and improvement of public transport since the Stevens/Bruxner governments of the 1930s. Only Milton Morris could compare in any way during the intervening period and, like the Greiner/Fahey government, that Askin/Willis Liberal government didn't stay in power long enough (nor had the financial backup) for the reforms and purchases initiated by Morris to gain momentum, with the subsequent Wran government taking credit for the foundations laid by Morris. Apart from the occasional misfired thought bubble, Constance has reasonably competently carried forward the vision commenced by his predecessor (and I suspect she still had a quiet guiding hand in the background). The only criticism I'd make of both of them was they tended to take at unquestioning face value some of the poorer advice provided to them by TfNSW. I think both of them have quietly reformed much of that agency though.

I know there will be dissent from what I've said from those of the leftward political persuasion, but I have studied the history of it in great detail and frankly I'm fairly buggered to think what NSW Labor has achieved in the field of public transport since the 1920s. They basically fell asleep during their long period in office from 1941 to 1965, noteworthy only for planning a few things and then not doing them (coal railways electrification being a notable exception) and vastly outweighing that by closing the tram systems, which robbed the city networks of a huge amount of capacity.

Wran/Cox are often given much credit and they did achieve a few things, but a lot of that was on foundations (and vehicle/vessel purchases) started by Morris. Their major achievement was probably the XPT, but then they stuffed that immediately by treating it as something special and charging first class fares, thus depriving most regional travellers of their affordable public transport. So much for being the party of the workers.

Carr and his successors (too many Transport Minsters to remember their names) repeated the 1940s/50s story by promising things and then not building them and the planning for them was, in any case, already done by the Greiner/Fahey government. To their credit, though, they did start metro planning and bus reform, including acquiring a large fleet of artics (driven more by an anything-but-trams mentality than anything else).

The one big downside I'd attribute to the Liberals (which Labor subsequently acquiesced in) is introducing double deck trains on the suburban system (but not interurban where the V sets were a masterstroke). It was a quick fix for the problem of system capacity in lieu of infrastructure investment. It worked OK for about 25 years while patronage remained stagnant, but since the population/patronage explosion of the last couple of decades it has come around to bite us on the bum. Establishing a metro system then became an urgent priority and this should save the day, including relieving pressure on the double deck system. The important thing now is that this momentum is maintained.

At the last State election, Labor didn't have a public transport policy, other than a short motherhood statement. Just sayin'
User avatar
Swift
Posts: 13247
Joined: Sat Mar 06, 2004 1:23 pm
Favourite Vehicle: Porshe 911 Carerra
Location: Ettalong- the world capital of 0405s.

Re: Imminent Change of Minister

Post by Swift »

Labor is adhering to it's strategy of biding it's time for voters to tire of the current party I see. The lock downs and the polIce state we're living in may enhance this strategy of theirs, or hold it back with the worldwide attention the Victorian Police, under the Andrews government, are attracting.

Dominic Perrottet's swearing in as our new premier will mark the first time we've had a millennial premier and one who's younger than me (b.1982).
NSW, the state that embraces mediocrity.
Transtopic
Posts: 1490
Joined: Fri Nov 25, 2011 10:10 pm

Re: Imminent Change of Minister

Post by Transtopic »

tonyp wrote: Sun Oct 03, 2021 3:07 pm
I know there will be dissent from what I've said from those of the leftward political persuasion, but I have studied the history of it in great detail and frankly I'm fairly buggered to think what NSW Labor has achieved in the field of public transport since the 1920s. They basically fell asleep during their long period in office from 1941 to 1965, noteworthy only for planning a few things and then not doing them (coal railways electrification being a notable exception) and vastly outweighing that by closing the tram systems, which robbed the city networks of a huge amount of capacity.
That's a bit disingenuous Tony, and although I'm not of the leftward political persuasion as you put it (I'd consider myself to be a Centrist), you conveniently omitted the fact that there was the Great Depression in the 1930s and during Labor's period in office from 1941 to 1965 there was the intervening World War II and its immediate aftermath. They just ran out of money for obvious reasons, having lost their income taxing powers which were taken over by the Commonwealth during the war. They at least did restart construction on the Eastern Suburbs Railway, but had to curtail it because of the lack of funding. It is also pertinent that Wran's Labor won the 1976 election on a platform of improving public transport compared with the Liberal's Askin era pro-freeway expansion, which was subsequently curtailed, not that I entirely agree with the way it was cancelled.

Although, like you, I lament the closure of Sydney's tramway system, you have to look at it in the context of the time, when private motor vehicle use was increasing exponentially and except for a few instances where there were separate tramway reservations, running trams on narrow arterial roads at the time in competition with increasing motor vehicle traffic wasn't sustainable. This was a worldwide trend, except for some cities in Europe and notably in Melbourne, which generally had the benefit of wide road corridors compared to Sydney. Perhaps in hindsight, they could have retained some of the major tram trunk corridors such as we now have for L2 and L3, including along Elizabeth Street, Oxford Street and Parramatta Road.

I agree that the Carr Labor government and its following administrations promised so much on rail expansion proposals, but fell short on fully delivering them. It did at least complete the Epping to Chatswood Rail Link, although falling short of completing the line to Parramatta, and initiated construction of the South West Rail Link, which was completed under the subsequent LNP government. Their greatest failing was not following through with the Metropolitan Rail Expansion Program (MREP), which would have linked the NWRL with the SWRL via a new harbour tunnel and the Airport Line and East Hills Line.

The Liberals are not without criticism with their privatised Airport Line, which turned out to be a dud financially, and commuters are still paying the price with high access fees to the airport stations, as well as adding to congestion on the City Circle which might otherwise have not been the case if it had been extended across the harbour to the North West Rail Link.

In spite of your antipathy, the introduction of DD trains on the Sydney rail network at the time was a perfectly logical solution to resolve capacity restraints on the network, compared with the alternative of running longer SD trains which would require an expensive lengthening of platforms on every station, not to mention that it would not be practicable in every situation, including on the existing CBD underground stations. This has been a strategy adopted in other overseas jurisdictions where the loading gauge permits DD operation. What would you suggest should have been the strategy at the time?

.
tonyp
Posts: 12348
Joined: Tue Nov 28, 2006 2:31 am

Re: Imminent Change of Minister

Post by tonyp »

The aftermath of the great depression was the time that the Stevens governments launched into public transport investment as one path to rebuilding the economy. rather the same as the current Liberals do now. As for Wran's government, it's little understood how much of their program simply continued what Milton Morris started which was, not only bringing together separate public transport agencies "that didn't talk to each other", as Morris put it, but a program of renewal across all public transport modes. The Wran government was given a flying start in public transport by work already done and naturally the propaganda of the time (and the adulation of the true believers ever since) attributed that to Wran/Cox. The portrayal of the Askin/Willis era as a motorways only one is completely wrong. They were the only significant government between Stevens and the current government to address transport across the whole front AND act on it.

The alternative to the double deck solution was expansion of system capacity - building new lines and extra tracks to separate existing lines in order to spread the load. There wasn't a train capacity issue - the 8-car single deck standard sets were rated to carry 1,500 passengers - but there was a problem of system capacity. The drift into double deckers occurred for two reasons. One was that they were lured by the promise of a capacity of 2,000 people per train, which turned out to be unworkable because of the passenger exchange/dwell time problem created by having only two doors and internal stairs. This problem was masked for many years because patronage remained stagnant through the 70s and 80s, into the 90s, after which the problem really reared its head. The other reason was that the higher seating capacity of the double deckers were attractive because most journeys across the system were quite slow, as they still are. This could be solved of course by having more trains at closer headways but the system constrained that possibility. So it's easy to see why both Labor and Liberals turned to metros as a solution. The current government acted on that.
Linto63
Posts: 2809
Joined: Wed Feb 03, 2016 3:44 pm

Re: Imminent Change of Minister

Post by Linto63 »

When it comes to politics, those that have their colours firmly nailed to the mast of one party or the other tend to overstate the achievements of their preferred party and gloss over its shortcomings. An objective look would suggest that parties of both persuasion have made some inspired decisions, but both have made some clangers as well. Is easy to sit back in the arm chair and offer an opinion with the benefit of hindsight, but in all probability many of the decisions, both good and bad, would have been made regardless of who was in power.

While the current government has made some much needed big spends on public transport infrastructure, although way short of what it has on roads, given the amount of the family silver it has flogged off, so it should have.
tonyp
Posts: 12348
Joined: Tue Nov 28, 2006 2:31 am

Re: Imminent Change of Minister

Post by tonyp »

Linto63 wrote: Mon Oct 04, 2021 11:31 am When it comes to politics, those that have their colours firmly nailed to the mast of one party or the other tend to overstate the achievements of their preferred party and gloss over its shortcomings. An objective look would suggest that parties of both persuasion have made some inspired decisions, but both have made some clangers as well. Is easy to sit back in the arm chair and offer an opinion with the benefit of hindsight, but in all probability many of the decisions, both good and bad, would have been made regardless of who was in power.

While the current government has made some much needed big spends on public transport infrastructure, although way short of what it has on roads, given the amount of the family silver it has flogged off, so it should have.
The historical evidence for which governments produced the best holistic (as opposed to piecemeal, which is what you're talking about) outcomes is there if you want to look for it. It also has nothing to do with which side of politics you support. The evidence indicates that conservative governments in NSW have performed better on public transport than Labor governments over the past century. This is in contrast to almost every other state where the situation has typically been the opposite. A blind supporter of conservative governments would doubtless not pass on that bit of information.

I feel this is because the NSW Liberal Party has always been more sophisticated than its interstate counterparts (largest state with greatest GDP has something to do with that) and has seen the importance of good public transport to the functioning of the economy. Congested cities and long journeys to work are counter-productive. NSW Labor, on the other hand, has been more influenced by its union base, extending back to the 1917 strike and subsequent long-term resentment of the railways and tramways departments.

As part of his holistic approach, Milton Morris set up the PTC which, although it was unwieldy at first because it uprooted the comfortable life of three siloed agencies and caused a bot of resistance, was basically the predecessor of today's TfNSW (which the current government has extended further to include roads and maritime). The supposedly reformist Wran came along and split it back into two silos and so it stumbled along as a fractured entity until 2011. Greiner could have done more but there was a lot of quiet background planning during that time (in Dept of Planning more than Transport) that laid foundations for much that happened - or didn't happen but should have - during the subsequent Labor governments. The Liberal Fahey approved the reintroduction of trams into the mix and Labor, which hated them, got the credit for their non-intrusive opening along the disused goods line while resisting their extension into the CBD. Labor's huge purchase of artic buses was an attempt to demonstrate that we don't need trams. In the end, we find that Sydney has grown so much that we need both.

I stand by my interpretation of the general pattern (waxing and waning) of a holistic approach to public transport in NSW. We're now in a waxing phase and long may it last before Labor returns and puts it to sleep again - said apolitically! Now question me about WA, for example, and you will hear the words Labor and Liberal transposed.
Linto63
Posts: 2809
Joined: Wed Feb 03, 2016 3:44 pm

Re: Imminent Change of Minister

Post by Linto63 »

tonyp wrote: As part of his holistic approach, Milton Morris set up the PTC..
Headed up by the lamentable Philip Shirley, nuff said.
tonyp wrote: Labor's huge purchase of artic buses was an attempt to demonstrate that we don't need trams.
Fact or just your opinion? Given that the majority of articulated buses were deployed on corridors where the reintroduction of trams has never been seriously considered, unlikely.

It's all very well to wax lyrical about what governments may have done if they had remained in office, but they should be judged on what they did / didn't do. Apparently Milton Morris was in favour of reinstating trams, yet in his 10 years in office, did nothing about it while signing off on the purchase large numbers of buses.

As to new governments getting the credit for the initiatives of their predecessors, that's the joys of long lead in times, hence Wran got to launch the Mercedes O305s, Greiner the Tangaras, Carr the Inner West Light Rail and O'Farrell the South West Rail Link.
User avatar
Fleet Lists
Administrator
Posts: 23803
Joined: Sat Mar 06, 2004 12:49 pm
Location: The Shire

Re: Imminent Change of Minister

Post by Fleet Lists »

Linto63 wrote: Mon Oct 04, 2021 2:16 pm
As to new governments getting the credit for the initiatives of their predecessors, that's the joys of long lead in times, hence Wran got to launch the Mercedes O305s, Greiner the Tangaras, Carr the Inner West Light Rail and O'Farrell the South West Rail Link.
But did Greiner really achieve anything positive in his own right?
Living in the Shire.
tonyp
Posts: 12348
Joined: Tue Nov 28, 2006 2:31 am

Re: Imminent Change of Minister

Post by tonyp »

Fleet Lists wrote: Mon Oct 04, 2021 2:20 pm
But did Greiner really achieve anything positive in his own right?
It was a period during which a lot of foundation planning was done, which was a necessary precursor to implementation, given that previous planning schemes had become outdated by then. This included the Integrated Transport Strategy and Sydney's Future. These came out under Fahey who was more proactive about public transport than Greiner. So, no, I struggle to think of anything Greiner might have achieved. It was Fahey who brought more credit to that period of government and that planning benefited the subsequent Labor governments.
Linto63 wrote: Mon Oct 04, 2021 2:16 pm Headed up by the lamentable Philip Shirley, nuff said.
No it's certainly not enough said. It doesn't invalidate in any way the need for a central, coordinating public transport agency. The choice of a CEO may turn out badly in many cases and this was rectified with Reiher, but then he was scorned by the Wran government which came in only a year after he was appointed. Also I think at staff level, the siloism stubbornly persisted and this white-anted the PTC. So in 1980 they split up again but at least they were to talk to each other from then onwards. I imagine a lot of lessons from the PTC era were pondered over while assembling TfNSW as we know it now.
Last edited by tonyp on Mon Oct 04, 2021 3:55 pm, edited 1 time in total.
User avatar
boronia
Posts: 21567
Joined: Sat Mar 06, 2004 6:18 am
Favourite Vehicle: Ahrens Fox; GMC PD4107
Location: Sydney NSW

Re: Imminent Change of Minister

Post by boronia »

Linto63 wrote: Mon Oct 04, 2021 2:16 pm
tonyp wrote: Labor's huge purchase of artic buses was an attempt to demonstrate that we don't need trams.
Fact or just your opinion? Given that the majority of articulated buses were deployed on corridors where the reintroduction of trams has never been seriously considered, unlikely.
I thought it was about "we don't need double decker buses".
Preserving fire service history
@ The Museum of Fire.
Merc1107
Posts: 2243
Joined: Sat Jul 07, 2012 6:38 pm
Favourite Vehicle: MAN 18.310, MB O405NH, L94
Location: A Coastal City

Re: Imminent Change of Minister

Post by Merc1107 »

I suppose the following is a can of worms to get into round here(!), but will bite:
Linto63 wrote: Mon Oct 04, 2021 2:16 pm Given that the majority of articulated buses were deployed on corridors where the reintroduction of trams has never been seriously considered, unlikely.
Were those artics particularly concentrated on the Metrobus routes, or did they make regular appearances on other corridors similar to those you describe?

The situation sounds more like the product of careless scheduling, that infamous, "a bus is a bus" attitude that infiltrates so many depots and operators around this country of ours. In the West, the classic example are shifts (of any flavour, including nights) that have a particularly busy school run requiring an articulated bus. So that shift (or part of the shift, where applicable) is allocated the high capacity bus. The rest of the shift's running may carry scarcely enough passengers to fill a Toyota Hiace, while the same depot is operating peak-period trips leaving the city at the brink of overcrowding, or at least with standing passengers, with rigid buses. This sort of attitude reached a point where the overseeing authority, the PTA, had to come along and mandate the use of articulated buses on the busiest route on the network.

So the question is, has the STA managed the use of these buses to take advantage of the capacity they offer, or have they been slack, and simply allocated them to shifts with specific trips that might need the capacity, as in the example above?
tonyp
Posts: 12348
Joined: Tue Nov 28, 2006 2:31 am

Re: Imminent Change of Minister

Post by tonyp »

boronia wrote: Mon Oct 04, 2021 3:54 pm
I thought it was about "we don't need double decker buses".
During the time the big artic fleet build-up was commenced in the 2000s a lot of external tram advocacy was developing, riding on the back of the IWLR (the "foot in the door") and a number of defensive bus "justification" statements by Transport starting appearing here and there. A certain somebody you know on TDU worked there and will also be able to provide more internal insight than I. They knew that they had a rapidly-developing capacity problem with the population growth and growing road congestion, but the bus people in the organisation wouldn't admit that there was anything that buses couldn't handle. Artics were the obvious potential compromise, double deckers being too slow both in moving and in passenger exchange. Then it took another several years (during which the situation described by Merc1107 prevailed) to deploy those artics most effectively as they are today - typically on former tram routes.
User avatar
boronia
Posts: 21567
Joined: Sat Mar 06, 2004 6:18 am
Favourite Vehicle: Ahrens Fox; GMC PD4107
Location: Sydney NSW

Re: Imminent Change of Minister

Post by boronia »

Weren't the first batch of artics (O305gs) used on the northern beaches routes to replace Atlanteans?
Preserving fire service history
@ The Museum of Fire.
tonyp
Posts: 12348
Joined: Tue Nov 28, 2006 2:31 am

Re: Imminent Change of Minister

Post by tonyp »

boronia wrote: Mon Oct 04, 2021 4:10 pm The first batch of artics (O305gs) were used on the northern beaches routes to replace Atlanteans.
Yes, certainly that's true, but I'm talking more widely across Sydney. I think the artics were broadly intended to be applied to Metrobus routes which they were, but otherwise rather scattergun in their deployment. Somebody might know details better than me.
User avatar
J_Busworth
Posts: 680
Joined: Fri Feb 24, 2017 9:56 am
Favourite Vehicle: Scania L113TRB Ansair Orana
Location: On the X74, because it's faster than the tram
Contact:

Re: Imminent Change of Minister

Post by J_Busworth »

As much as I never loved the substance of Constance's time as transport minister, in hindsight I will always appreciate his unapologetic and steadfast style. I don't know that any member of this current government can quite fill the shoes he has left behind.

Much of the discussion above reflects my view that Transport planning should have a long term outlook and not merely give in to short term partisan politics as many Transport Ministers of the past have. I hope that whoever comes next in this Liberal Government, and the Labor Transport Minister that will inevitably follow when they next form government, will look to ensuring that the long term plans set up under this current government can be completed. Further that they may be well placed to ensure that long term bipartisan planning takes hold as the norm in NSW for our Transport network.
https://transportnswblog.com
RIP STA L113s 28/01/93 - 12/01/22
iamthouth
Posts: 438
Joined: Sun Oct 24, 2010 5:38 pm

Re: Imminent Change of Minister

Post by iamthouth »

Any tips or proposals for a new Transport Minister?
Linto63
Posts: 2809
Joined: Wed Feb 03, 2016 3:44 pm

Re: Imminent Change of Minister

Post by Linto63 »

Fleet Lists wrote: But did Greiner really achieve anything positive in his own right?
Closed the Chullora Workshops after it was realised the frivolity of stripping buses back to their frames every 6-8 years when they just didn't need that level of overhaul. Unfortunately no plan to perform repaints that were necessary was implemented, meaning we ended up with an appalling image with each depot applying its own interpretation until the ice white livery was introduced in 1993. Also pruned the country passenger network including withdrawing the last sleepers, although political necessity resulted in some back tracking with the Xplorers and XPT sleepers ordered.
Merc1107 wrote: Were those artics particularly concentrated on the Metrobus routes, or did they make regular appearances on other corridors similar to those you describe?
Of the 80 Custom Coaches bodied Volvos delivered in 2005/06, 30 were replacements for the Northern Beaches Mercedes O305Gs while the others were allocated to Ryde and Waverley depots for use on the Victoria Road and Oxford Street corridors. The 150 Volgren bodied Volvos delivered in 2010/11 were primarily for Metrobus routes.
Merc1107 wrote: So the question is, has the STA managed the use of these buses to take advantage of the capacity they offer, or have they been slack, and simply allocated them to shifts with specific trips that might need the capacity, as in the example above?
They do tend to be concentrated on high frequency corridor routes, 100, 333, 500X etc.
tonyp
Posts: 12348
Joined: Tue Nov 28, 2006 2:31 am

Re: Imminent Change of Minister

Post by tonyp »

Merc1107 wrote: Mon Oct 04, 2021 4:01 pm So the question is, has the STA managed the use of these buses to take advantage of the capacity they offer, or have they been slack, and simply allocated them to shifts with specific trips that might need the capacity, as in the example above?
Linto63 wrote: Mon Oct 04, 2021 5:18 pm They do tend to be concentrated on high frequency corridor routes, 100, 333, 500X etc.
Except for 333 Bondi, these are quite recent. It hasn't been the case for most of the decade since 2011.

A good indicator of where artics are needed in the older part of Sydney is the former major tram routes. 333 follows the Bondi tram route, 100 the Mosman tram corridor, 500X the Ryde line, the Northern Beaches services (artic and double decker) the former Narrabeen line. Another now-concentrated artic deployment is the Botany Rd corridor (former Botany tram) and, of course the SE corridors are now tram again, with some artics going further out which will ultimately be replaced by a metro line. The Western and Southwestern tram lines were generally interlaced among Sydney's closest concentration of radial railway lines, so there wasn't so much necessity to match the tram capacity. Nevertheless, IWLR fills a lot of gaps as at circles through Leichhardt and across a couple of those radial rail lines.

Other artic services are out west on the Liverpool-Parramatta and NW busways, again fairly high demand corridors.
J_Busworth wrote: Mon Oct 04, 2021 4:26 pm
Much of the discussion above reflects my view that Transport planning should have a long term outlook and not merely give in to short term partisan politics as many Transport Ministers of the past have. I hope that whoever comes next in this Liberal Government, and the Labor Transport Minister that will inevitably follow when they next form government, will look to ensuring that the long term plans set up under this current government can be completed. Further that they may be well placed to ensure that long term bipartisan planning takes hold as the norm in NSW for our Transport network.
If WA is a guide, there is a basically bipartisan long-term transport plan for Perth, but what tends to happen is that Labor implements a lot of the railway projects and many of the road ones and the Liberals neglect the rail projects but not the road ones. However, everybody generally supports the plan. We have similar in NSW, but in terms of implementation it's Labor for roads and Liberals for railways and roads. Bipartisan support is one thing; even-handed bipartisan implementation is another.

Some of the other state and territory Liberal partys need to wake up. The NSW Labor Party needs some clear insight into itself (still counting after a decade).
Transtopic
Posts: 1490
Joined: Fri Nov 25, 2011 10:10 pm

Re: Imminent Change of Minister

Post by Transtopic »

tonyp wrote: Mon Oct 04, 2021 8:17 pm We have similar in NSW, but in terms of implementation it's Labor for roads and Liberals for railways and roads.
You're joking of course? You have such a twisted view of the world.
tonyp
Posts: 12348
Joined: Tue Nov 28, 2006 2:31 am

Re: Imminent Change of Minister

Post by tonyp »

Transtopic wrote: Mon Oct 04, 2021 8:51 pm
You're joking of course? You have such a twisted view of the world.
What joke? Do you remember Carr's list of transport promises and virtually only the road ones were built? The present government has been moving forward pretty evenly on both fronts.
Post Reply

Return to “Discussion - Sydney / NSW”