Communities along the inland rail have welcomed Dr Kerry Schott’s damning review into the National party’s key infrastructure project, saying they have felt dismissed for years over concerns around the route selection, traffic disruption and noise.
Schott’s long-awaited report found “astonishing” cost blowouts in the 1,700km line, now estimated to cost more than $31bn.
But Schott underlined she had no confidence in the current estimate due to lack of certainty around the completion date and the final costs.
The review recommended focusing on the southern end of the railway project from Melbourne to Parkes. It also recommends a CEO be appointed to address governance issues. The Albanese government, which commissioned the review, says it remains committed to the project.
A number of communities along the proposed route say they feel vindicated by Schott’s findings.
One such community is Wagga Wagga in New South Wales. In September, the Wagga Wagga city council said in a submission on the Inland Rail’s environmental impact statement that the current route would split the city in two and leave “a legacy of adverse environmental impacts”.
Schott said Wagga Wagga and Gatton were towns where traffic disruption could be reviewed from time to time and “that an easement bypassing the town be preserved for future use”.
Wagga Wagga deputy mayor, Jenny McKinnon, welcomed the recommendation to make “appropriate modifications” to limit noise and allow cross-town access for towns cut in two.
“Everything we’ve heard from inland rail up to now has been that they do not expect any noise impacts,” she said.
“My question now is once this is all built and done … whose responsibility is it to look after all these impacts?”
McKinnon, who is the council’s inland rail spokesperson, wants to see the route go around Wagga rather than following the current rail lines.
“We think it is one of those nation building projects but it’s just the route that needs to change,” she said.
Wagga Wagga state MP Joe McGirr said the review’s findings rang alarm bells for him particularly with regard to the [Australian Rail Track Corporation’s] estimates for traffic disruption.
“Frankly, if the governance is as concerning as Schott outlined, then I am concerned about the work that [ARTC have] done,” he said.
“They clearly say that where it goes through a regional town, you ought to be making preparations to go around the regional town.”
Federal MP Michael McCormack, who holds the seat of Riverina and shared carriage of the project as infrastructure minister in the former Coalition government, said while he wasn’t against re-routing the line around Wagga Wagga, it would increase the cost and build times. He has also been critical of Wagga council for failing to engage with ARTC before the design was completed.
“There are some community concerns, I appreciate that and they need addressing but it was a shame that council didn’t have a bit more of a say when they had the opportunity when it was 30% through the design process,” he said.
Consultation has been lacking, communities say
The inland rail project is designed to run 1.8km double-stacked freight trains between Melbourne and Brisbane in 24 hours. The review estimates that by 2050, almost 70% of the freight to be carried will be for domestic use, including household goods and groceries produced in Australia and consumed in major cities.
Asked whether the ARTC would consider bypassing the city or address traffic delays caused at level crossings, a spokesperson said it was working on a response to submissions on the EIS, and that response “will address questions on route selection, increased traffic, and level crossing wait times”.
Angus Witherby was planning director at Moree Plains Shire Council until last year and is a member of the Planning Institute of Australia’s policy committee for NSW dealing with transport. He said even at a cost of $31bn, the project was still worth doing.
“When we compare it, for example, with the cost of the level crossing removal program in Melbourne, or the metros in Sydney, it’s not that expensive,” Witherby said.
“[At Moree council] we found that building anything was become significantly more expensive.”
John Simpson is chair of Euroa Connect, the community organisation formed to address concerns around the inland rail in the Victorian town. He said he was “disappointed” the review did not address concerns around ARTC’s community consultation and engagement practices.
“We believe that until the recent scrutiny of the independent review, they have done a very poor job of genuine engagement,” Simpson said.
“Their approach was to impose a solution on towns like Euroa and then try to convince the community that this predetermined outcome was the only possible way forward.”
In Narrabri, NSW, civil engineer and irrigation specialist Jim Purcell, who raised issues with flood risks of the current route, said the Schott report was welcomed but recognising the problems in the rail project was only the first step.
“Much more work must be done to listen to local communities and work with them,” Purcell said. “Community input should be an important part of the route selection process. Nobody knows an area better than those who live and work there.
“This rail line will be in place and operating for generations and there is no justification to rush through the route selection because it is convenient for Inland Rail.”
The ARTC is understood to be still working through the review. The company’s initial statement said it would work closely with the federal government to implement Schott’s recommendations.
