Asked to make a sacrifice

The local papers, especially, have been full of articles about the effects of the Regional Rail announcements on residents of the inner west. We were particularly struck by the comments of Nick Fahey (The Mail, 21/7/10):

"I'm clearly in support of public transport and this project. As much as its painful to be affected by it, somebody has to be affected. But if we've got a group of people who are being asked to make a sacrifice you show them some gratitude and respect."

Elsewhere he expresses shock at the lack of compassion shown by many Victorians (including government representatives) for those who will lose their homes.

Gratitude, respect, compassion - is that really too much to ask?

Confusion, lack of explanation, "on the nose"...

A great article by Clay Lucas in the Age on Saturday deserves a read. A few quotes:


"[Footscray resident] Illich... has been bewildered by the lack of open process behind the probable demolition of the 440-square-metre warehouse conversion her family settled on in April...Illich knows the railways need improvement, and does not want to be portrayed as being only interested in her backyard. She just wants to know why the process for deciding where a new rail line would go was so secretive.

"As Footscray residents learnt this week, the government's plans appear to evolve rather than be carefully evaluated and publicly reviewed. Projects such as the Regional Rail Link, which gained federal funding last year, are rammed through without much explanation, while others such as a freeway link between the Eastern Freeway and CityLink are ignored or put in the ''long-term'' basket.

"...Victoria [is] bucking the world trend on planning big projects. ''Normal practice is to go in for full public consultation, including involving the public in writing the brief for the studies. That is the way that has been found over time to reduce the amount of concern and reduce the potential political backlash at a later date.''

"Melbourne University transport academic John Stone did his PhD on ''community consultation''. He says the chaotic scenes this week as residents learned from reporters that their homes could be swept away are a direct result of the government being so guarded about releasing information."

Where next for the Regional Rail Link?

A number of us have been to visit the information sessions about the Regional Rail Link. We've been pleasantly surprised by the staff who have been at the sessions to answer questions, who have been friendly and frank. See, answering our questions makes us feel better, not worse!

Though the general route has been released, finer details are yet to be determined. (The final plans are due to be complete in about three months). For example:

• The RRL team will be discussing with the Salvation Army exactly how much of their land is required (the site of the old Footscray pool) and will investigate the possibility of curving the lines so that the railway reserve on the other side of the tracks is used instead.
• It's not yet clear which track will cross over which for the flyover near the Maribyrnong River and exactly where the flyover will occur.
• They aren't sure yet exactly how much land along Buckley Street will be required.

Apart from the residents of Buckley Street, the other places affected that we know of are the two auto businesses either side of the Hopkins Street underpass, part of the land attached to the block of flats at the corner of Fordham Reserve, a sliver of Fordham reserve and of course the businesses adjacent the railway in the Joseph Road precinct. The car park on Irving Street next to the station will be used for new platforms. West Footscray station will be moved further west.

Anyone who is affected by the new route should make a written submission to the Department outlining your concerns. Also include any ideas you have, however small, on how the effects of the new tracks on your property & neighbourhood could be lessened. (For example, if your house will now face a railway line, how can its visual impact be reduced?). Include photographs if they help make your point.

Submissions are due by 19 August 2010 and should be sent to Mr Corey Hannett, Executive Director, Regional Rail Link, Department of Transport, PO Box 2797, Melbourne VIC 3011.

Also, Colleen Hartland from the Greens held a meeting with residents from Buckley Street and elsewhere about their legal rights. A community group has formed to take up the compensation fight.

Our houses are safe, but...

Yesterday everyone on our street received letters from our State representative, Marsha Thompson, telling us that our houses would not be demolished to make way for the new Regional Rail Link tracks.

Naturally we were relieved. But as the day wore on, we learned of the other houses in Footscray that would be demolished. Their owners learned of this through the media, rather than from their government. It's a terrible way to find out your home is going to be destroyed.

Precise details of which parts of Footscray will go are still to be released. Also, there is still very little transparency to the decision-making process, which continues to be of concern to us.

We've put together a media release on our views. We encourage everyone along the railway corridor to attend the upcoming information sessions the government are running, to find out more.

We'll probably re-jig this blog a little in the coming weeks to become something that keeps track of the long construction process that will now begin. We're still concerned about the effects of this project of Footscray and want to make sure the government does everything it can to ensure the best outcome for our community.

More information:

• Route animation
• Track routes
• Works packages (open for tender)
• Premier's media release
• Coverage in The Age

Last week we received a letter from Justin Madden. We do appreciate his response to us. Unfortunately, it didn’t answer any of the questions in the letter we sent to his department 84 days ago. (Hence the clock keeps ticking).

When the RRL project started, we assumed the government would be open about their decision-making process. We asked them how they were going to decide where the new tracks would run, rather than where they would run.

However, the workings on this project were deemed to be ‘not in the public interest’. There is no discussion. There is no transparency.

Without transparency, how can anyone judge whether the government is using its $4.3 billion of taxpayer money wisely? How can we sure they are putting adequate weight on the value of neighbourhoods, community, heritage & livability when considering route options?

If the government believes they are making the right decisions for the right reasons, they should be willing to defend them. Their reasoning needs to stand up to public scrutiny and debate.

We can accept our homes might be knocked down for the greater good (though it would make us very sad). What we’re most worried about is that the government’s idea of ‘the greater good’ is very different from ours.

Where am I?

So where is Railway Place anyway? And what on earth is the Joseph Road precinct?

To work out exactly where we are and what’s at stake, take a look at our interactive map. You can learn more about our neighbourhood and take a virtual tour of the development land other side of the tracks. Just click on the markers, shading and lines to view images, video and captions.

A reader has alerted us to a very interesting article in The Age: Government denies right to know ripoff. Kenneth Davidson discusses the current planning process in Victoria, whereby many public projects are run by 'public private partnerships' (PPPs). These arrangements are designed to curry favour with powerful business interests, who then enjoy the protection of the State government. If managed poorly, these projects may be "privately profitable but socially wasteful".

These projects generally have very poor transparency. Any cost-benefit analyses conducted are rarely published, and, even if they are, the public is not given access to the underlying data. Commercial confidentiality is used as an excuse to limit the disclosure of information. Consider the following quote:

...[the system] lend[s] both legitimacy and authority to arrangements that would be entirely questionable if subject to any reasonable and authentic scrutiny. That is why the government has frustrated attempts to gain any meaningful information by classifying the contractual detail as ''confidential''.

The Regional Rail Link may not be a PPP, but this is beginning to sound familiar...