Comments on: Free Public Transport for Students

By: Daniel

Daniel — Tue, 21 Nov 2006 14:41:07 +0000

Good point, use the money to run trains after midnight. Surely that can't cost more than $180,000/day? I'm not exactly sure, but I think Connex's daily running costs are a smidge over $2 million, all told, so surely another 10% will do it for just another handful of trains.

I guess it's hard to make up good transport policies when you have a car and a driver, though. Remember that one time that Bracks caught the train and was late to work?

By: ME

ME — Tue, 21 Nov 2006 13:17:50 +0000

Its just another politcial stunt to win votes from the younger generation. The way the students would see free public transport – “Hey, this means when I go in to the city to pop some e’s and get drunk on the weekend I won’t have to remember how much it costs to get home on the train cos its free. I can now use the already discounted price of public transport to buy another drink, wooohooo!”

By: Daniel

Daniel — Tue, 21 Nov 2006 07:27:02 +0000

I'm always a little suspicious about calls for "millions of dollars of education equipment." Is education equipment really what's needed? How about we fund state schools enough so that they can keep their buildings clean and well-maintained first. Visit Blackburn High, see what I mean. Even after that, I think it's more important to address the social issues of education then simply chucking science labs and computers at students. Just as the government should read the mX and work with transport companies to solve the issues there, they should pay attention to what's actually happening in schools, and work with them to solve the genuine problems, not simply throw money at particular politically important issues.

That doesn't win votes, though. Pity.

As for free transport, I do think it makes more sense to direct that to low-income earners- including, if you want, university students. More concerned about the un- or barely-employed, though, and overcoming obstacles to work (eg. living in broadie and not being able to get to an interview in Richmond.)

By: andrew

andrew — Mon, 20 Nov 2006 23:27:32 +0000

i think the liberals are trying to sell this more as a measure to ease pressure on family budgets. i agree with you that it wont help out studets or education though.

By: Nathan

Nathan — Mon, 20 Nov 2006 21:26:11 +0000

Politics at its finest, though didn’t the ALP promise something similar? The party that commits to a more comprehensive rail network gets my vote more than this wallet-finding exercise.

By: karan

karan — Mon, 20 Nov 2006 17:48:15 +0000

Public Transport is free for students in NSW (though there is the idea of an “exclusion” zone, say if you live within 15 min walk from school). When the government looked at cost cutting by saying it would no longer be free, there was an immediate outcry followed by a quick back-flip.

As a concerned voter without kids, your position is valid. But if you had kids, it would get you thinking “Well that’s another $30 per kid I don’t have to fork out each month”, you’re going to seriously consider that a worthwhile vote. Why, that’s $30 a month to compensate for the interest rate rises, and everything else that goes with it. Suddenly, it’s not costing anything to send your kid to school on public transport – why drive the kid there? Save 15 minutes in the car in the morning as well. That’s saving petrol too. It’s also looking like a green policy.

It’s not a education policy so much as a cynical effort in going for the wallet of the voter. They’re doing the fix-the-transport thing here in NSW before the March election, but infrastructure takes time – 2010 is the first scheduled delivery. The voting public doesn’t wait that long.