Chapter 1
Introduction and background
Referral of inquiry
1.1
On 12 December 2013 the Senate referred the following matter to the
Senate Rural and Regional Affairs and Transport References Committee
(committee) for inquiry and report by 27 March 2014:
The role of public transport in
delivering productivity outcomes;
- the
need for an integrated approach across road and rail in addressing congestion
in cities, including Sydney, Melbourne, Brisbane, Adelaide and Perth;
- the
social and environmental benefits of public transport projects compared to road
infrastructure projects such as Westconnex and the East-West Link;
- the
national significance of public transport;
- the
relationship between public transport and building well-functioning cities;
- the
decision of the Federal Government to refuse to fund public transport projects;
- the
impact on user charges arising from requiring states to fund public transport
projects; and
- any
related matter.
1.2
On 27 March, the Senate granted an extension of time for reporting to
the committee. The committee was required to report by 4 December 2014.
Conduct of inquiry
1.3
The committee advertised the inquiry on its webpage and in The
Australian, calling for submissions to be lodged by 30 January 2014. The
committee also wrote directly to a range of organisations and individuals
likely to have an interest in the matters under consideration, drawing their
attention to the inquiry and inviting them to make written submissions. Details
of the inquiry and associated documents are available on the committee's
webpage.
1.4
The committee received 45 submissions which are listed at Appendix 1.
The submissions were published on the committee's webpage.
Acknowledgement
1.5
The committee thanks those organisations and individuals who made
submissions and provided evidence to the committee's inquiry.
Public transport use in Australia
1.6
Public transport is defined as all transport systems that are available
to the public which charge set fares and run on fixed routes.[1]
1.7
Urban public transport (UPT) was once the dominant means of passenger
transport around major capital cities. However, the growth of private vehicle
travel over the last 65 years has contributed to a situation in which UPT now
accounts for only approximately 10 per cent of all urban passenger travel.[2]
1.8
According to census data, in 2012, approximately seven in 10 people (71
per cent) aged 18 years and over travelled to work or full time study primarily
by passenger vehicle as either a passenger or driver. Only 16 per cent of
Australians used public transport while four per cent walked and two per cent
cycled.[3]
1.9
The relatively low usage of UPT correlates with high usage of private
cars. Indeed, it is Australians' love affair with the car that characterises
the country's transport story. A downward trend in public transport use began
in the 1950s with the rise in private car ownership particularly in Sydney,
Melbourne and Brisbane. Over the 58 years from 1955 to 2013, the number of
passenger vehicles registered in Australia increased from 1.4 million to 13 million,
an average annual growth of 4 per cent. In 2013, passenger vehicles accounted
for over three quarters (76 per cent) of all registered vehicles.[4]
1.10
Australia now has the second highest level of car ownership per capita
in the world and the third highest per capita rate of fuel consumption in the
world. Perth, Adelaide and Brisbane are rated as among the most car-dependent
cities in the world with Sydney and Melbourne not far behind.[5]
1.11
In 2008, private road vehicles represented approximately 90 per cent of
city motorised passenger transport.[6]
The 2013 motor vehicle census revealed that 13 million Australian passenger
vehicles were registered that year (amounting to one vehicle per 1.37 people of
driving age). By way of comparison, in 1955, there were 153 passenger vehicles
per 1000 people and by 2013, this rate had increased to 568 people per 1000
people.[7]
In Brisbane, which is expected to have the highest congestion growth rate of
all Australian capital cities over the next decade, an estimated 80 per cent of
all commuter trips are currently taken by private car.[8]
1.12
However, the overall growth in car ownership is expected to flatten by
2020 for reasons including the involved costs.[9]
One demographic sector for which car use has already stagnated, if not dropped,
is among youth. In 2008 only 51 per cent of this age group owned a car and the
figure continues to decline.[10]
At the same time, studies have revealed that the number of license holders
under 30 years is declining at a rate of more than one per cent a year.[11]
In 1991, of all persons aged 20–24 years in NSW, 79 per cent had a driver's
license. Consequently, young people tend to use public transport at a higher
rate than older generations.[12]
These changing factors must be taken into account in policy decisions regarding
transport investment.
1.13
Evidence suggested that it ended in the late 1970s when UPT patronage
began to increase again. According to the Department of Infrastructure and Regional
Development (department), the resumption of UPT growth was triggered by rising
petrol prices, increasing traffic congestion, parking problems, and since 1985,
an increase in the price of new cars.[13]
From 1977 to 2010, UPT grew annually by 1.96 per cent from 10.1 billion
passenger kilometres in 1977 to 19.1 billion in 2010, thereby almost doubling
over the three decades.[14]
1.14
From 2001 to 2010, UPT grew at an average rate of 2.57 per cent per
annum, thereby outstripping population growth of 1.58 per cent per annum.[15]
According to the Bureau of Infrastructure, Transport and Regional Economics
(BITRE), UPT use increased from 9.8 per cent to 10.9 per cent over this period.
The key determinants of this growth were falling UPT fares and increasing
discretionary income constraints, including the effects of the global financial
crisis on the savings rate.[16]
By 2011, the overall public transport mode share for commuter travel in the
country's 18 major cities had risen to 15 per cent with Sydney the highest at
22.5 per cent and Albury-Wodonga the lowest with 1.1 per cent.[17]
Urban public transport demand
1.15
According to the department, UPT demand is expected to grow by
approximately one third from 2011 to 2030.[18]
Population growth in Australia's capital cities is a key driver of this growth.[19]
In Perth, as a case in point, public transport patronage grew 67 per cent from
1999 to 2009 at a time when the population grew by 22 per cent.[20]
Over this period, annual train patronage in Perth grew from 9.7 million to 54.7
million passengers and reached 63 million in 2011.[21]
1.16
Yet, growth in the public transport task is not only expected in
Australia's most populated cities. Estimates based on analysis conducted over ten
years (2001–2011) revealed that other cities and areas such as the Gold Coast,
Canberra, Hobart and Geelong will also experience added demand for future
services.[22]
1.17
Taking the nation as a whole, the department noted the following about
the projected growth of the overall metropolitan transport task in terms of
passenger-kilometres (pkm):
Although motor vehicles still dominate urban passenger
travel, it is estimated that by 2030 the aggregate metropolitan passenger
transport task will rise from 195 billion pkm in 2012 to 290 billion pkm; about
a 50 per cent increase in 18 years, and the metropolitan public transport task
will grow by 44 per cent from 2012 levels, primarily through population growth
rather than a significant shift in the proportion of people using public
transport.[23]
Population density, public transport and access to employment
1.18
With approximately 65 per cent of the total estimated resident
population of Australia living in capital cities (14.5 million of 22.3 million
people), Australia is currently one of the most urbanised countries in the
world.[24]
The four largest cities, Sydney, Melbourne, Brisbane and Perth, accounted for
almost 60 per cent of national population growth from 2001 to 2010, despite
substantial migration from the cities to other cities and regions.[25]
By 2061, Australia's population is expected to reach between 36.8 and 48.3
million with 74 per cent expected to live in these capital cities.[26]
1.19
Australia's major cities generate approximately 80 per cent of the
country's gross domestic product (GDP) and employ 75 per cent of the nation's
workforce.[27]
The central business districts (CBDs) remain the largest concentration of
employment across Australian cities. The department noted that of all jobs
offered in metropolitan areas of Australia's five largest capital cities, 10 to
21 per cent are located within a CBD, resulting in very high employment
density.[28]
1.20
With the historical concentration of business activity in CBDs,
transport infrastructure has also tended to emanate from CBDs in a radial
pattern, designed to transport employees from broader metropolitan areas to the
city centre.[29]
This phenomenon is reflected in commuter transport usage whereby inner sector
workers using the public system to access inner city jobs account for between
74 and 82 per cent of total public transport use by commuters in Sydney,
Melbourne, Brisbane and Perth.[30]
In comparison, the public transport mode share is typically low for outer
suburban jobs at 2–3 per cent in Perth, Brisbane and Melbourne and at 5 per
cent in Sydney.[31]
1.21
The centralisation of businesses in CBDs enhances productivity as many
industries continue to agglomerate to central areas and gain greater access to potential
employees, customers, collaborating firms, suppliers and ideas. However,
Australia's CBD's will only remain prosperous as long as the benefits of
agglomeration outweigh the cost of congestion. As the department cautioned:
Therefore, strong economic growth will remain contingent on
the ability to effectively move hundreds of thousands of people every day on
public transport during the peak commuter period.[32]
1.22
In some cities, the location of city-based jobs has continues to undergo
change with the central CBD no longer the focal point for employment. A study
of the Melbourne CBD revealed that in 2006, only 28 per cent of metropolitan
jobs were located in the inner city (i.e. within a five kilometre radius of the
town hall) with a further 50 per cent located within a 13 kilometre radius. The
study found that the average job was located 15.6 km from the centre. It
concluded that the centre of mass had moved 2 km further towards the vicinity
of Tooronga or 7.9 km from the CBD. Additionally, the geographical location of
jobs varies across employment sectors:
While over 80% of Retail and Manufacturing jobs were located
more than 5 km from the centre, Commercial Services jobs were split roughly
50/50 between the inner city and the suburbs. This sector consists mainly of
finance, insurance, business services and property services jobs. Those located
in the CBD and inner city include major financial institutions and-high level
producer services jobs servicing corporate clients. Those in the suburbs
however tend to service the resident population, for example, real estate
agents and personal financial advisers.[33]
1.23
The trends observed in Melbourne are set to continue. According to BITRE
projections of population and jobs to 2031, the outer sector of each city will
contribute the largest share of population growth and be the fastest growing in
terms of employment.[34]
These projections suggest that short commutes within the outer sector will
account for the largest proportion of increased commutes in Perth, Sydney,
Brisbane and Melbourne.[35]
An increase in the relative importance of same-subregion commutes was also
forecast along with a decline in the relative importance of inward commuting
flows. At present, inward commuting accounts for about three-quarters of public
transport use. The department outlined the implications of these projections
for public transport:
These forecasts of rapid outer suburban job growth pose a
challenge for increasing the future overall public transport mode share, as
public transport is typically not as mature or well served in these outer
metropolitan locations. However, these more complex trip demands (increased
employment in outer suburbs and overall reduction in the dominance of commuting
to and from CBDs) are not unique internationally. Overseas experience suggest
that a reorientation of the dominant public transport operating paradigm – to
better service those making trips within outer suburban subregions will be needed
to avoid a mismatch between workers pursuing affordably priced homes and their
desired places of employment. [36]
1.24
By 2030, estimates suggest that Australia's population will grow to 31
million from 23 million with more than 90 per cent of Australians living in
cities, towns and near-city regions. This will put Australia behind only
Argentina as the highest urban population as a percentage of the country's
total population.[37]
With population and economic growth set to continue, Australia's cities will have
to face the growing challenge of mitigating congestion and maintaining
accessibility. As the department noted in evidence:
In what is already a highly urbanised society, the increasing
trend of urbanisation of Australia’s population will result in denser cities
challenging how our transport networks are designed and operated, and risks a
proportion of the population being 'locked out' of their city's prosperity by a
steepening inner-city house price gradient and longer commutes.[38]
Relationship between public transport and well-functioning cities
1.25
Evidence to the committee highlighted the importance of efficient,
accessible and reliable transport networks as fundamental to well-functioning
cities and productive populations. According to the Australasian Railway
Association (ARA), a well-functioning city is one that is sustainable and
capable of meeting the needs of the population into the future.[39]
1.26
Catholic Social Services Australia (CSSA) argued that a well-functioning
city is one where citizens, including low income and disadvantaged people, can
have the opportunity to fully participate in the social and economic fabric of
the community. CSSA upheld the view that public transport is a critical element
to foster this participation.[40]
Similarly, Professor Currie made the point that cities, as the powerhouses of
the economy, function 'almost entirely because there are public transport
systems available to get people there'. Public transport is very efficient in
handling large volumes of people and when public transport systems are closed,
congestion results.[41]
1.27
The Committee for Perth emphasised that cities are the major drivers of
economic growth and productivity in Australia and that there is a strong and
well-established link between transport efficiency and city productivity.[42]
Given the importance of cities to Australia's economy, the productivity and
competitiveness of Australia's cities is an issue of national significance.[43]
1.28
The Grattan Institute emphasised that as cities are crucial to national
productivity, ensuring that businesses across cities have access to a range of
skilled workers is more important to growth and productivity than ever before.
However, it argued that transport infrastructure too often holds productivity
back. This is a particular challenge in the outer suburbs of Sydney, Melbourne,
Brisbane and Perth where residents can reach fewer than 10 per cent of all
metropolitan jobs within a reasonable commuting time. In fact, according to the
Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) Sydney is so
badly connected that its economy functions more like a city of one million than
that of its 4.5 million population.[44]
1.29
According to the Sustainable Transport Coalition of Western Australia (STCWA),
one of the key elements to a well-functioning city is that of walkability. It
argued that walkability benefits from good public transport, while public
transport is totally reliant upon walkability given that almost all public
transport trips require walking at each end. Pedestrians provide 'eyes on the
street' and therefore increased personal security for local communities, enjoy
health benefits and provide custom to local shops. Therefore, the point was
made that simply providing more public transport would not in itself lead to
well-functioning cities. STCWA maintained that what is required for a
well-functioning city is integrated locality design which supports walking and
cycling and operates in unison with public transport.[45]
COAG National Urban Policy
1.30
The Council of Australian Governments (COAG) has acknowledged the
importance of cities to growth and productivity, sustainability and liveability
as well as their importance to accommodating demographic change and population
growth. In recognition of the importance of city planning to sustainable growth
and productivity, COAG introduced capital strategic planning system reforms in
December 2009. As part of these reforms, COAG announced the national objective
for future strategic planning capital cities along with criteria for capital
city strategic planning. The objective is to ensure Australian cities are
'globally competitive, productive, sustainable, liveable and socially inclusive
and are well placed to meet future challenges and growth'.[46]
1.31
COAG included as its first criteria integration across functions,
including land-use and transport planning, economic and infrastructure
development, environmental assessment and urban development, as well as across
government agencies.[47]
As part of its reform agenda, COAG asked the COAG Reform Council to review
capital strategic planning systems and in December 2011, the council submitted
its final report to COAG. Of the three areas suggested by the council for
future development, the second was that of public transport and:
Putting more emphasis on public transport to combat
congestion and address social inclusion by integrating transport planning with
land use decisions.[48]
1.32
COAG responded to the council's report in April 2012 and agreed that
continued intergovernmental collaboration be taken forward by the Standing
Council on Transport and Infrastructure (SCOTI). SCOTI had been established in
September 2011, bringing together Commonwealth, state and territory as well as
New Zealand ministers responsible for transport and infrastructure issues as
well as the Australian Local Government Association with the objective to:
...achieve a co-ordinated and integrated national transport and
infrastructure system that is efficient, safe, sustainable, accessible and
competitive. Achieving this objective will support and enhance Australia’s
economic development and social and environmental well-being.[49]
1.33
In 2011, the National Urban Policy was introduced with the objective of
reinforcing COAG's national objective for Australian cities.[50]
Navigation: Previous Page | Contents | Next Page