John Anderson, ACRI Chair – Speech to ALC Forum Melbourne March 2015.

“Ministers, ALC Chair, distinguished guests, ladies and gentlemen.  This is the first time the Australasian Centre for Rail Innovation has been represented at an Australian Logistics Council Forum – the recognised premier voice for the transport and logistics industry in Australia.  It is our first time because we had not been formed at the time of the previous Forum. We came into being in July last year. So perhaps it would be a good start to tell you something about us – very much a newcomer on the block.

I must stress that we are Australasian, so we include New Zealand.  Our two economies are very closely linked – indeed, perhaps more linked than any two economies in the world.  Also, we are not for profit. Perhaps more importantly, we are an independent research body.  So we are not representing an industry association and we are not from the government, but we ARE here to help you!

Our main objective is to provide professional, independent applied research, strategic and economic analysis, advice and innovative solutions for the Australian and New Zealand rail industries, and to the transport industry more generally where it links with rail.

I mentioned that ACRI is a newcomer, but it has a history.  ACRI was formed in July 2014 to build upon the research base generated by the Cooperative Research Centre for Rail Innovation.  The CRC for Rail Innovation was part of the Federal Government’s general program of scientific research, but ended after seven years on 30 June 2014. The CRC’s streams of research have covered climate and the environment; workforce development; performance; smart technology; safety and security and urban rail access. ACRI is building on that research and undertaking new research on its own initiative and on projects that are important to industry.

Several universities and research organisations are strategic research participants with ACRI. We have a strong and deeply experienced independent board — from government and industry,  and I am privileged to be its chair.

Now, I mentioned that ACRI is a newcomer here, but as many of you are aware that when I was wearing another hat in a Government that now seems far, far away – perhaps the “good old days”, I might venture to say – I played a modest role in setting the groundwork for the creation of the Australian Logistics Council.  When I was Minister for Transport in 2000 we created the Freight Transport Logistics Industry Action Agenda.

Eventually that led to the March 2002 Industry Leaders Roundtable where 59 senior business representatives endorsed the industry’s agenda for action.  The Roundtable was the first time so many senior executives of logistics service providers and their customers gathered at one place, and in proposing an agenda for action they endorsed, as a priority, the formation of the Australian Logistics Council. I was honoured to be the ALC’s inaugural chair in 2002.

So, more than a decade later, wearing a different hat, I am pleased to be addressing you, and again saying that we are here to help.  Some of you may be aware that yet another hat I now wear is being chair of the Implementation Group for the Melbourne-to-Brisbane Inland Rail project. It complements exactly the role of the ACRI.  The ACRI stresses the need for research and analysis.  And that is precisely what is happening with the Inland Rail project – detailed analysis building a strong business, economic and national case for the project.

The research is showing that the case for the project is now becoming compelling.  The resources boom is declining, the opportunity of the Asian Century is upon us and the freight challenge is looming.

The corridor from Melbourne to Brisbane generates 75 percent of Australia’s GDP and exports more than $260 billion in commodities from its ports annually.  Freight volumes in this corridor will double by 2030 and triple by 2050.  The existing freight network won’t cope with this increase in freight without further investment.  We aren’t realising the full potential of Australia’s top four agricultural regions and the $300 billion in coal reserves throughout Southern Queensland.

Inland Rail will complete the spine of the national freight network between Melbourne and Brisbane via regional Victoria, NSW and Queensland. Inland Rail will connect our major capital cities, farming regions, mines and export ports and divert through-freight out of the congested Sydney rail network.

With a road-competitive service offering of 24 hours transit time, 98 percent reliability, road competitive pricing and freight availability when the market wants, Inland Rail will attract existing freight to rail and provide capacity to meet the freight growth of the coming decades.

It will help businesses, farmers and miners to reduce their transport costs, making domestic products cheaper and our exports more competitive.  The shift to rail will ease road congestion, reduce wear and tear on our roads, improve road safety and reduce fuel consumption and carbon emissions.

Inland Rail will create several thousand jobs during construction with many more jobs created through the procurement of goods and services, new activity in our farming and mining sectors, the launch of new, value-added regional businesses and complimentary investment from transport operators.  We have the opportunity to invest in infrastructure that will create jobs now and wealth for generations to come.  Skilled labour is plentiful and capital is more affordable than ever.

The Implementation Group has had significant industry and local government consultation. Over the next few months we will be concentrating on finalising the business case, settling the alignment and beginning detailed design on key components.  The task is complicated, but essential.  The project will require very significant public funds towards what will be one of the biggest and most complex infrastructure projects in our history.  It is therefore important we get it right.

Indeed, the significant interest in the Inland Rail project (coming on the heels of the much-maligned but now lauded Alice to Darwin rail link), is part of a general resurgence in rail as part of the national transport infrastructure in both Australia and New Zealand.  Australia’s already substantial freight task is expected to double by 2030 and triple by 2050.  Without solutions, national productivity and economic growth will be constrained.

To date, research shows that the Inland Rail project will provide a road-competitive service based on transit time, reliability and cost, with a terminal-to-terminal transit time of less than 24 hours Melbourne to Brisbane.  This will complete the backbone of Australia’s freight rail network, linking the five major capitals and economies. Inland Rail will facilitate reliable connections from regions to export markets, providing links to Australia’s largest cities and to the west.  It will be critical, future-proofed infrastructure offering nationally significant benefits.

It will:

• Increase national productivity, benefiting consumers through lower freight transport costs;
• Improve rail connections to capital cities and ports for regional communities in three states;
• Provide for greater regional economic development along the corridor;
• Significantly improve the rail link between Brisbane and the three capitals of Melbourne, Adelaide and Perth by bypassing the Sydney metropolitan rail network; and
• Enable the future freight task to travel on rail which will improve road safety, and reduce congestion and environmental impacts.

The Implementation Group has had significant industry and local government consultation.  Over the next few months we will be concentrating on finalising the business case, settling the alignment and beginning detailed design on key components.  The task is complicated, but essential. Whatever the final solution for Inland Rail it will require very significant public funds towards what will be one of the biggest and most complex infrastructure projects in our history.  It is therefore important we get it right.

Indeed, the significant interest in the Inland Rail project is linked to a general resurgence in rail as part of the national transport infrastructure in both Australia and New Zealand.

I think it would be fair to say that the resurgence of rail has been in a large part due to the dynamism that private-sector culture has brought to the sector in the past 10 years or so. As those rail networks expand, it is critical that we do not go in blindly, that we have the information and the analysis to ensure that our transport investments are the best value for money, to produce the optimum prosperity and safety for our people.

ACRI is not a blind proponent of rail as the solution to all or even most transport tasks.  Rather, ACRI seeks to improve existing rail systems and to do the research to underpin worthwhile future extensions to those systems.  Moreover, we see our role as improving the links between rail and other modes of transport so the whole supply chain becomes safer and more efficient.

Australia and New Zealand are sparsely populated and have significant geographic challenges – Australia’s tyranny of distance and New Zealand’s rugged topography.  It means we have fewer dollars per transport kilometre and less revenue per transport kilometre. The essential lesson is that we have to be smarter and cleverer in the way we invest in both new and existing transport infrastructure.  In short, we have to do our homework. Doing rail homework is the essential task of ACRI. If we do that homework, we do not throw good money at projects or programs with poor prospects. And more importantly, we ensure that strategically worthwhile investments in projects and programs do not get overlooked.

Because of rail’s enmeshed links with other elements in the supply chain, ACRI is pleased to be at this Forum, to explain what we do and how we can help with the task of making a more efficient and safer industry.  We believe ACRI plays a vital role in doing that in the transport industry and we are keen to join others in the industry to pursue those aims.  ACRI believes that our research will pay for itself many times over through better use of resources, increased safety and greater efficiency generally.  A recent project looking at safety at level crossings in Australia and New Zealand is a good example.

In 2007 the death of 11 people at a level crossing in Kerang in Victoria shocked the nation.  Tragically, four of those killed were children.  A coroner’s inquest was held into those deaths and into a further 15 deaths at level crossings in Victoria in the first decade of the 21^st century. Since that time the Public Transport Victoria has worked tirelessly to ensure that such a tragedy does not occur again.

The national experience of about 10 people being killed each year in vehicle collisions at level crossings tell us that a greater national effort is needed.  Then there is the economic cost.  Collisions between vehicles and trains tend to be more destructive than other road collisions. Damage to trains and track can run into “several million dollars for a single crash”, according to the Australian Transport Council.

There are no easy solutions.  Detailed research is needed to ensure that money directed at improving safety at level crossings is spent well.  We have to start by acknowledging that the cost of putting lights and boom gates at all 9400 level crossings in Australia would be prohibitive.  Fewer than 30 per cent have lights and/or gates now.  Equipping the rest would cost between $1.2 billion and $1.8 million.  So we have to find cheaper but effective strategies.  Projects in the ACRI Level Crossing Agreed Work Program include looking at whether enforcement cameras at level crossings will help reduce collisions. Another will look at more affordable control technologies, bearing in mind the need for them to be failsafe and cost effective.

Another project is to investigate the distance at which a train becomes identifiable (in particular when it is travelling in a straight line toward the observer) and also at what distance it is possible for an observer to judge the speed of a train.  The results will feed directly into the review of Standard AS1742-7, which details signage requirements at level crossings.  This directly relates to the Victorian Coroner’s identification of “the human factor” in level-crossing collisions.  Sixty percent of deaths happen at controlled crossings.  This suggests that lights and boom gates are not a total solution, and that even with lights and gates some crossings might remain dangerous because the angle of the road does not permit a vehicle driver to assess the speed and distance of a train accurately enough to prevent a collision.

ACRI hopes that the results from the research from its Level Crossing Work Program will help answer some of the questions about how these collisions occur and what can be done in a cost-effective way to reduce or eliminate them in the future.  This is preferable to blindly adopting some simplistic, but ultimately ineffective, solution that might just be a waste of money.  I have mentioned the level-crossing project in some detail because it is an obvious example of where research into rail can benefit the wider transport industry.

Rail is a critical industry for Australia.  It has revenues of about $18 billion^[1] a year; employs 41,400^[2] people and contributes about $10.4^[3] billion to the Australian economy each year.  It is crucial that it remains competitive against other modes of transport.  But it is also important that rail does not waste resources trying to compete when the figures do not stack up.  It would be better to concentrate on where we do well or where expansion will pay off.  You can only make that judgment after the research has been done.

In the longer term, industry and governments will take more integrated approaches to transport planning – again creating challenges and opportunities.  Rail needs a national approach.  It will require development of efficient standards and regulation, coherent national policy and the fostering of research and collaboration.

More broadly, we need more nuanced research on track condition monitoring; technologies for improving rolling stock performance; new technologies for improving worker and passenger safety and operational efficiency; improving transport mobility in urban centres; economic analysis for calculating projections for population and freight movements for planning purposes, calculating the costs and efficiency of links between rail and other modes of transport; and so on.  Where intellectual property rights permit, we hope to publish research to the widest possible audience and to contribute more broadly to the Australian and New Zealand public debate about rail transport and transport more broadly, with the aim of delivering economic and safety benefits to the whole community.

In the future, rail will have to cope with increased energy costs, but can take advantage of that over other modes of transport.  The demand for resources will drive demand for rail, but international forces will demand it be more efficient.  Population growth and traffic congestion will increase passenger demand for rail, provided rail meets the challenge.

Materials technology is a good example.  For every kilogram of weight removed from a locomotive, you can add another kilogram of goods.  When carriages are made stronger and lighter, again more freight can be carried.  Alternative materials that do not compromise safety, performance, recyclability or add to maintenance costs present great opportunities for rail.  Given Australia’s world-leading position in the area of heavy haul, export opportunities await.  Rail needs national standards and national regulation in matters like product approval and validation, bidding processes, safety, wayside energy storage, data and communication, inter-modal cargo handling, electronic systems, and risk management.  But research is needed to highlight the safety and economic gains before governments and the public can be persuaded of the case for change.

When the research base is persuasive a national bipartisan rail policy is more likely to emerge.  That will benefit all in the industry and, more importantly, consumers and business who directly or indirectly use rail.

So can I finish by using another transport metaphor and say that much water has passed under the bridge since ALC was created, and the ALC is to be congratulated for sustaining the momentum of providing a voice for Australian logistics supply chain customers and providers and a voice for infrastructure owners and suppliers, and, more broadly for fulfilling the vision of developing high performing supply chains in Australia.

ACRI hopes to be a part of that vision for a long time to come.”