Case for inland rail is flawed

“A MUCH clearer vision to the project,” Mr Coulton states.

What pomp and stance for an infrastructure project – wow, an inaugural conference for the Inland Rail project.

Every public relations exercise is being deployed to spruik the benefits of this project but the facts remain: The Inland Rail’s business case is flawed, it doesn’t go to port and there is no public private partnership brokered.

There is also mounting pressure on the government to put this so-called equity injection on budget because of its flimsy profitability forecast. No wonder there is still so much uncertainty around the completion of the Inland Rail project, especially for the Queensland section.

Take your hats off to the Palaszczuk government for taking a stand and not being bullied into signing an intergovernmental agreement where the benefits to Queensland will be miniscule.

“Bite the bullet” Mr Dunford. It

‘‘ NO, THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT BLINDLY CONTINUES TO PURSUE THIS BOONDOGGLE WITHOUT AN ENGINEERING DESIGN OR COSTING FOR THE FLOODPLAINS NOR FOR ONE OF THE COUNTRY’S LARGEST TUNNELS.

would be a very brave government to spend an extra $3.8 billion on this already questionable project to get it to port, especially when accurate costings for the current project are still to be completed.

That aside, the number of voters that would be affected in the metropolitan areas of Brisbane would lead to a gigantic voter deficit for the government in the upcoming federal election.

The National party needs to remember its farming roots. Sending the Inland Rail east as soon as it reaches the Qld/NSW border does not benefit the farming communities of Qld. Show me a Qld farmer who would utilise this new rail line to send their produce to Acacia Ridge.

If the current Federal Government listened to common sense, they would send the rail inland where it could not only pick up Qld farmers’ commodities but our state’s vast expanse of resources.

The route to Gladstone has affirmed public private partnerships and would not require the government to spend taxpayers’ money on further feasibility studies to move the rail to the north.

It does not have the population pressures of Brisbane. Furthermore, it would assist to develop the northern regions of our sunshine state and benefit the state’s coffers.

No, the Federal Government blindly continues to pursue this boondoggle without an engineering design or costing for the floodplains nor for one of the country’s largest tunnels.

LARRY PAPPIN, Athol