The car as the sole focus of transport is past its use-by...

[Aushiker]

by date says NSW Transport Minister, Gladys Berejiklian.

She said most modern economic analyses of public transport did not fully capture its benefits, and cities such as Los Angeles, built around the car, were having to change.

''Globally, we are seeing the resurgence of public transport because of its positive economic and social benefits,'' the minister said.

''The car as the sole focus of transport is past its use-by date. Motorways are important, and relevant, and improving them is necessary … But new motorways must consider public transport connections and the opportunity to allow rapid bus transit or other transport options as part of the construction.''

Motorways such as the M4, M5 and M2 have been built without dedicated public transport infrastructure.

In emphasising public transport, and the importance of another rail crossing for Sydney Harbour, the minister's speech departed from Infrastructure NSW's strategy which said another crossing was not needed for decades.

Read more: http://www.smh.com.au/nsw/cars-buses-sh ... z2DZ9iePif" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Andrew

[rkelsen]

But she's a Liberal. She can't say stuff like that...

[zero]

I can't tell with Gladys. She is a public transport user, and that probably makes her near unique in either main party here. One is after all a property developers party these days and the other is the liberal party

Gladys out making pro public transport / rail / tram / bus statements is however unfortunately usually a harbinger for the liberal party to go on and announce another $10 billion road toll road project, with a cost benefit ratio barely above 1.

[Alien27]

Credit where it's due fantastic words from the minister. Fingers crossed for some action.

[r2160]

And yet they still wont recognise cycling as a viable mode of transport . . .

cheers
Glenn

[redned]

''The car as the sole focus of transport is past its use-by date." but we keep pumping hundreds of millions of dollars into subsidising a foreign company to make cars in Australia that nobody wants to buy.

[sogood]

And yet they still wont recognise cycling as a viable mode of transport . . .

They are two faced to ensure they don't lose their traditional supporter base and can capture the vote of the environmentally conscious. Clever. As said earlier, it'll come down to what they will actually do.

[g-boaf]

And yet they still wont recognise cycling as a viable mode of transport . . .

cheers
Glenn

And why should they? People gave them a mandate to "Get Clover", didn't they?

[ausrandoman]

I've been hearing that for thirty five years. In another thirty five years, refugees from the Murray-Darling dustbowl will be crossing the Great Dividing Range in cars.

[Xplora]

LOL
Liberal Party doesn't have any interest in appeasing the Greens' base; that's a game that they force the ALP to play (and it's paying dividends!). The mandate was solely to destroy the ALP, and they aren't doing a good job of it.

It strikes me as ironic that they would end up moving about 5 times as many people, just as quickly, into the CBD if they just let 2 lanes of traffic be used by bikes. Each car spot can take 15 bikes...

[Baalzamon]

One simple word

Agreed