Road planners, drivers must face future
TRANSPORT
I have no expertise in town planning, however, I despair at the headline ' State told no time to lose over $31b road ', (14/7). It demonstrates that thinking among people who are responsible for our future urban transport still have their heads in the same place as American transport planners for the past 100 years.
I do know that our current over-dependence on road transport and the way we think about cities is not the only way. Ideas such as 15-minute cities where people can access most facilities within 15 minutes of environmentally friendly movement, the need to be able to access natural spaces, a built environment that feels safe and connected rather that busy, dangerous, roads dividing communities, movement of people that emits as little gas and fine particle rubbish as possible, are already out there. The needs of people and the environment require a deeper discussion involving far more people than a ha
ndful of 'experts' locked in the past.
Howard Tankey, Box Hill North
Announce rail like you mean it
You have to hand it to the road lobby. Even though it has been proved for years and years that building roads never solves congestion, here we are faced with another huge money-guzzling project. This so-called solution to rising population and traffic congestion has eight lanes of traffic and a four-track rail line. No doubt the rail line will be scrapped as it has in all the other freeway projects. Let's get on with rail planning that will have positive results for Melbourne.
Rod Oaten, North Carlton
What about an outer metro line too?
Re ' Calls for construction to start on an outer ring road are expected as Melbourne grows ', (14/7). At the same time, an outer ring (rail) metro rail should proceed, as this would save billions when a cut and cover method is used.
David Robertson, Wheatsheaf
Great Ocean Road builders knew how
Government planners for the new 100-kilometre outer metropolitan ring road have estimated the cost will be $31 billion and take 15 years to build. The Great Ocean Road, which is 240 kilometres long and largely built on cliff faces, took the same amount of time and cost an astonishing $15 million when adjusted for inflation. How has construction efficiency gone so far backwards in less than 100 years?
Nick O'Donoghue, Elwood
Limit older drivers to newer cars
Many newer vehicles have active safety features such as pedestrian and obstacle recognition. The car will thus brake immediately once these are detected. My car even does it when I am reversing if an obstacle, such as a child, is walking behind the car. Perhaps a licence condition for older drivers should be that they can only drive vehicles that have these safety features.
Graeme Daniels, Balwyn North
Problem not age, it's danger
Your correspondent (Letters, 14/7) refers to her ″dear, elderly gentleman″ and her successful efforts to get him off the road. I'd like a dollar for every young mother I've seen, rushing at speed past a school while on a mobile. Or, every criminally unsafe male driver between the ages of 18-35 doped up to the eyeballs or off their face on booze. Or, come to think of it, middle-aged men who plough into a group at a pub. The issue is danger to others on the road.
Carmel Boyle, Alfredton
P-plate driver assessment too
On my way home from shopping I witnessed a crash. It was in part caused by the abysmally designed intersection resulting from level crossing removal, but mostly human error. Both drivers were decades younger than I am and the crash was caused by one driver turning right in front of oncoming traffic. That driver was a P-plater. Should all P-plate drivers be assessed to see if they are fit to drive?
Helen Moss, Croydon
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The Age
4 hours ago
- The Age
Road planners, drivers must face future
To submit a letter to The Age, email letters@ Please include your home address and telephone number below your letter. No attachments. See here for our rules and tips on getting your letter published. TRANSPORT I have no expertise in town planning, however, I despair at the headline ' State told no time to lose over $31b road ', (14/7). It demonstrates that thinking among people who are responsible for our future urban transport still have their heads in the same place as American transport planners for the past 100 years. I do know that our current over-dependence on road transport and the way we think about cities is not the only way. Ideas such as 15-minute cities where people can access most facilities within 15 minutes of environmentally friendly movement, the need to be able to access natural spaces, a built environment that feels safe and connected rather that busy, dangerous, roads dividing communities, movement of people that emits as little gas and fine particle rubbish as possible, are already out there. The needs of people and the environment require a deeper discussion involving far more people than a ha ndful of 'experts' locked in the past. Howard Tankey, Box Hill North Announce rail like you mean it You have to hand it to the road lobby. Even though it has been proved for years and years that building roads never solves congestion, here we are faced with another huge money-guzzling project. This so-called solution to rising population and traffic congestion has eight lanes of traffic and a four-track rail line. No doubt the rail line will be scrapped as it has in all the other freeway projects. Let's get on with rail planning that will have positive results for Melbourne. Rod Oaten, North Carlton What about an outer metro line too? Re ' Calls for construction to start on an outer ring road are expected as Melbourne grows ', (14/7). At the same time, an outer ring (rail) metro rail should proceed, as this would save billions when a cut and cover method is used. David Robertson, Wheatsheaf Great Ocean Road builders knew how Government planners for the new 100-kilometre outer metropolitan ring road have estimated the cost will be $31 billion and take 15 years to build. The Great Ocean Road, which is 240 kilometres long and largely built on cliff faces, took the same amount of time and cost an astonishing $15 million when adjusted for inflation. How has construction efficiency gone so far backwards in less than 100 years? Nick O'Donoghue, Elwood Limit older drivers to newer cars Many newer vehicles have active safety features such as pedestrian and obstacle recognition. The car will thus brake immediately once these are detected. My car even does it when I am reversing if an obstacle, such as a child, is walking behind the car. Perhaps a licence condition for older drivers should be that they can only drive vehicles that have these safety features. Graeme Daniels, Balwyn North Problem not age, it's danger Your correspondent (Letters, 14/7) refers to her ″dear, elderly gentleman″ and her successful efforts to get him off the road. I'd like a dollar for every young mother I've seen, rushing at speed past a school while on a mobile. Or, every criminally unsafe male driver between the ages of 18-35 doped up to the eyeballs or off their face on booze. Or, come to think of it, middle-aged men who plough into a group at a pub. The issue is danger to others on the road. Carmel Boyle, Alfredton P-plate driver assessment too On my way home from shopping I witnessed a crash. It was in part caused by the abysmally designed intersection resulting from level crossing removal, but mostly human error. Both drivers were decades younger than I am and the crash was caused by one driver turning right in front of oncoming traffic. That driver was a P-plater. Should all P-plate drivers be assessed to see if they are fit to drive? Helen Moss, Croydon
Sky News AU
5 hours ago
- Sky News AU
Jeffrey Epstein files won't ‘break apart' MAGA base
Journalist Batya Ungar-Sargon challenges the 'obsession' surrounding the Jeffrey Epstein files, arguing it won't 'break apart' the MAGA base. 'I have to say I'm with the President on this, I don't know why people are so obsessed with this story,' Ms Ungar-Sargon told Sky News host Rita Panahi. 'I don't think the average American is thinking about the Jeffrey Epstein file, I think they're thinking about whether groceries are going to go up, I think they're thinking about whether they're going to be able to afford presents for Christmas. 'Anyone who's bothered by this should keep pushing for it, I totally support that and I totally respect it, I just don't see this breaking apart the MAGA base.'
Sydney Morning Herald
5 hours ago
- Sydney Morning Herald
Time to scupper AUKUS and seek clearer waters
Australia is like a fish on a hook with these AUKUS submarines, except that a fish tries to detach itself and find clear water (' PM tested on US alliance ', July 14). Even decades before we are likely to see one of these subs, we have an American undersecretary for defence demanding that Australia commit to deploying the nuclear-powered boats supporting America should there be conflict in the Indo-Pacific. Time for plan B and clearer waters. Lyn Savage, Coogee Australia has a history of joining the US side in military conflicts. This is a strong display of where our allegiances lie. The US administration knows this yet chooses to demand an answer whether we would follow it into conflict with our most important trading partner as we are visiting that partner on a mission to improve trade and diplomatic ties. This deliberate act of sabotage demonstrates the deep lack of regard the US has for Australia's national interests. It is the sort of bullying that would warrant a response by calling the US ambassador to Australia in for a frank discussion. That is not an option because they haven't yet appointed an ambassador. Is that a display of disdain, or is it that they think so little of us that they haven't bothered? James Lawrence, Coogee The Trump administration, through Elbridge Colby, is saying openly what was previously unstated: the AUKUS subs will be paid for by Australia but will be an extension of the US Pacific Fleet. To accept this condition would mean surrendering our sovereignty. The response must be a resounding 'no'. John Richards, Turramurra Some members of the Australian press seem obsessed with questioning whether Anthony Albanese would sanction our involvement with the US in the possible defence of Taiwan against likely Chinese aggression. We ought to be thankful that our prime minister is cautious in making any such commitment. Everyone ought to be aware of the disastrous result of John Howard's full-on support of the military assault on Iraq, sans weapons of mass destruction. And at present, any commitment to the US should be tempered with the knowledge that it is led by an erratic individual whose focus is more on himself than on efforts to create and maintain world peace and stability. Albanese is plotting a measured, careful course, and is obviously keen to build friendship and forge permanent trading ties with our biggest partner in that area. Derrick Mason, Boorowa Kerry Packer once said you only ever get one Alan Bond, and I'm sure the Americans are saying you only ever get one Scott Morrison with the sucker punch of AUKUS. Everyone knows it will cost Australia over $1 trillion and the subs will be outdated if we ever get them. Philip Dowle, Wickham We're flying solo If Australia was depending on the AUKUS agreement to ensure our security, we have been sadly mistaken. We have already seen the condition-ridden approach of the US to AUKUS as being hardly beneficial to our defence capability, and now George Brandis (' Asia-Pacific no longer a focus for UK ', July 14) contends that the UK has shifted its emphasis, understandably, to being Europe-centric. This makes it clear that we are fundamentally on our own, however frightening that may be, with our former allies more intent on their interests on the other side of the world. Thus, it is more imperative that our relations with China remain positive, and this makes Albanese's present excursion to China more important than ever. Paul Keating's contention that our relations in the Asian sector were of prime importance was correct. Max Redmayne, Drummoyne Why our late and unlamented Coalition government ever thought the UK would put serious resources into defence in our part of the world has long been a mystery. So it's no surprise that the Asia-Pacific region is of marginal interest to the Starmer government. Much better to have joined with the French, who actually have a Pacific presence. AFUS, anyone? Greg Baker, Fitzroy Falls Missed opportunity The letter from your correspondent (Letters, July 14) cries out for a response. His suggestion that an Indigenous Voice 'would introduce racism into the parliament' is complete and utter nonsense. Given the entrenched disadvantage of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples, seen in and through government systems and practices since colonisation, I think we can safely say that his point is moot, to say the least. The No vote was, sadly, a missed opportunity for parliament to listen to an advisory body whose stated purpose was to help bring about a more equitable and just future for our Indigenous peoples – something that successive governments themselves, via their Closing the Gap strategies, have said and shown is necessary. I am tired of seeing and hearing such narrow, ignorant and disingenuous views of both our nation's history and of the Voice proposal: 'trickery' it was not. As Thomas Mayo reminds us, speaking about Indigenous history, 'We were once remarkably peaceful and happy, and we want that for our children today'. Is that too much to ask? Kerrie Wehbe, Blacktown The frustration concerning racist sentiment against Indigenous people shown by your correspondent is palpable, but I feel his comments that trivialise those who, for example, attend NAIDOC events are off the mark. Change does not generally come about in the style of the French Revolution. It comes about by thousands of individuals showing their support for a cause in any way they can, no matter how small, day after day after day. No one's denying we have a long way to go, but we should also not deny that overall support for Aboriginal people and their aspirations is light years ahead of where it was 50 years ago. Ross MacPherson, Seaforth The failure of the 2023 constitutional recognition referendum was disappointing enough without yet another attempt to rewrite its history. There were five years of consultation with Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples throughout Australia, leading to the 2017 Uluru Convention, which delivered the Uluru Statement from the Heart. The statement calls for 'Constitutional reforms to empower our people'. More specifically, 'We call for the establishment of a First Nations Voice enshrined in the Constitution'. The government decided to hold a referendum in 2023 to implement this request. There were not 'two separate issues'. Indeed, during this consultation process, the powerless symbolic recognition option favoured by your correspondent was one of several options rejected by Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples and by conservative constitutional lawyers. Symbolic recognition had been comprehensively rejected by the voters in the 1999 constitutional preamble referendum. In the 1967 referendum, voters overwhelmingly approved constitutional changes to give Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples the same rights as those enjoyed by all other Australians. In 2023, voters refused to include a powerful specific Voice for Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples in the Constitution. David Hind, North Sydney Racism is a failure to love our neighbour as ourselves. Racism is a failure of compassion. Such failure separates us from each other and violates our shared humanity. Racism makes slaves of us all. Mark Porter, New Lambton Rights, wrongs and the RBA Consternation about leaving interest rates on hold has been grist for the media mill (' If RBA is misguided on rates, we'll suffer from its fumbling ', July 14). A broader perspective would lament the lingering political and cultural quagmire driven by concern for housing borrowers. Housing borrowers were disadvantaged by the reluctance to increase taxes to manage demand. That left interest rate increases as the default option to control inflation. Conversely, while existing housing borrowers are savouring capital gains, new borrowers, paying higher prices, will be joining the queue looking for empathy. Savers funding housing borrowers get short shrift in quagmire-politics. When the inflation target is 2.5 per cent, and marginal tax rates are as high as 50 per cent, a cash rate of 5 per cent converts to 'zero' – and a net loss as things stand. On this reckoning, at least holding interest rates steady is more appropriate than rate reductions likely to exacerbate the crisis in housing affordability. Peter Mair, Dee Why I have already woken up to the fact that there is 'a better way to manage the strength of demand'. The RBA has reverted to direct control of interest rates, a practice that that was discredited and dumped last century. Don't play the poor mortgagors card. Paying back has always been difficult, but the rewards are great – just ask renters and the homeless. No, the fact is the RBA is impotent. A move in the cash rate is a two-edged sword because a reduction, say, is simply a transfer of spending power from lenders to borrowers. For all we know, that could lead to a reduction in aggregate spending at present. Your mortgagors will gleefully pay down their loans and, as surveys have suggested, increase spending hardly at all. From Gittins' previous writings, I get the impression that he too sees that stabilisation policy needs to be left to fiscal policy, which has a much more direct and measurable effect on the relevant targets – employment and inflation. Mike Bush, Port Macquarie I'd feel more comfortable about the RBA getting monetary policy settings correct if Ross Gittins were on the board. Mike Kenneally, Manly To be frank In relation to the upcoming productivity roundtable, the Commonwealth Bank does not want corporate tax rates to be reduced ('If life's a box of chocolates, tax reform takes the cake', July 14). But wait; a lower tax rate means a lower franking credit for its shareholders and more tax they might have to pay. Maybe the bank is also keeping one eye on its stratospheric share price. Michael Blissenden, Dural Debacle, baby, debacle Nick O'Malley (' Big toxic bill will cost US, and us all, ' July 14) is right to point to the potentially ruinous economic consequences of Trump's laughably misnamed big, beautiful bill. It should more realistically be seen as the belligerent belting of brother democracies. This is especially so in terms of its impact on climate change policy; the less we do and the more we procrastinate about this existential threat to human existence, the more we will pay. Though we cannot escape all the adverse effects of Trump's poisonous policies, we must redouble our own efforts to rid ourselves of fossil fuel dependence. Paying to do so now is essential. Ron Sinclair, Windradyne With Donald Trump urging American companies to 'drill, baby, drill', the United States and China are now headed in opposite directions regarding energy. China is electrifying its economy and installing renewables at unprecedented speed. The US, by contrast, is betting the house on energy sources that have been around for over a century and cannot benefit from technical innovation. Unfortunately, the economics do not favour the US model, meaning that American policy is setting China up to be the dominant power in coming decades. While this might be good for the planet, as China's emissions are now heading down, it is definitely not good for nations that depend on the United States for leadership and defence. The US urgently needs to change direction. It may never catch up. Ken Enderby, Concord Fridge on wheels I hope that commuters from the Blue Mountains enjoy the new trains after waiting so long (' Mountains commuters in line for new trains ', July 14). They are much better, but they are cold. The air conditioning seems to have only one switch, and on a cold winter's morning it can be unpleasant. Transport for NSW says you need to tell them which carriage number, as it may be a solenoid or something isolated, but a recent Saturday morning radio discussion about the trains had a number of people making the same complaint. The wider doors are very useful compared to the narrow ones but on a cold blustery day one dreads doors opening as the whole carriage can suffer. And why bother with those stupid little seats at the top of the stairs which simply cannot accommodate anyone bigger than four years old? Just put in shelves for the power outlets. You still get passengers loudly noting that he seats are facing 'the wrong way', of course. Tony Sullivan, Adamstown Heights Rescue the Roxy How the Roxy (' Historic theatre sits unloved for more than a decade ', July 14), only the second cinema in NSW to be added to the National Trust Register, could have been sold off privately and not supported and maintained by successive state governments is beyond comprehension. So little now remains of the history of Parramatta that it is soul-less as Sydney's 'second city'. George Zivkovic, Northmead Another building suffering dire neglect is the small 1920s Moorish-style service station on the corner of Princes Highway and Canal Rd, St Peters. After the government spending squillions of dollars on the M8, nothing has been done to resurrect this small gem or turn it into something useful. John Swanton, Coogee Fuel folly It is pure folly to think that EV trucks will ever be used in Australia's remote places (' Road ahead for electric big trucks a long-haul ', July 14). There isn't any grid electricity where they go. David Sayers, Gwandalan
