Page 4069 - Week 13 - Wednesday, 26 November 2014
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video
the ACT we can be proud that we have adopted a transparent and open approach when it comes to disclosure of the economic analysis that underpins the government’s decision to proceed with this project.
The business case contains a detailed outline of the project. It contains a detailed needs and benefits analysis. It includes economic analysis, along with a benefit-cost analysis. It also looks at different delivery models and it has a financial analysis. It is an important and detailed assessment. The business case clearly and objectively supports the case for building light rail for our city. This is a project that delivers $1 billion worth of benefits to the ACT economy. It shows that for every dollar spent there is $1.20 in economic return and economic benefit for our city.
This compares favourably with a number of other rail projects across the country, including projects that have been supported and built by state Liberal governments. For example, the light rail line to Dulwich Hill in Sydney, with a benefit-cost ratio of one, has nevertheless been delivered by the state Liberal government. Equally, there is the major north-west rail link in Sydney, with a benefit-cost ratio of 1.17. That is a project supported by the federal government and being delivered by the New South Wales Liberal government. So let us hear no more about so-called marginal BCRs when you compare them against the BCRs of rail projects that have been funded by Liberal governments in other jurisdictions in this country and which have been built or are under development.
This is a very important project. We need to look at what the business case tells us about the impact of not proceeding with it. We know, for example, that congestion costs are going to double by the year 2031 and will impact on our economy to the tune of $200 million per annum. That is the cost: the lost productivity in our economy from not acting to address rising congestion costs and the cost to the economy—$200 million. That is the federal government’s assessment of the impact of growing congestion in our city.
This is also a project that delivers in the context of a significant capital investment commitment by the ACT government. Let us put the costs associated with this project in some context. Over the next four years this government has committed funding of almost $2.5 billion for infrastructure projects—$2.5 billion just over the next four years. (Time expired.)
MADAM SPEAKER: Supplementary question, Dr Bourke.
DR BOURKE: Minister, can you elaborate on the billion dollars in benefits that are calculated in the business case?
MR CORBELL: I thank Dr Bourke for the supplementary. As I was saying, it is very clear when you look at the infrastructure spend of the territory as a whole that this is a project that is affordable. Turning to the issue of the $1 billion worth of benefits outlined in the project, in addition to the 3,500 direct jobs and over 50,000 indirect jobs that will be supported out to 2047 by this project, there are other significant financial benefits. For example: $222 million in transport time savings—that is the economic saving accrued through people having better transport journey times as a
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video