They've thought long and hard about selling it...

Here's one from 2005, and this is from The Age from August 2007 :

THE public relations campaign designed to create the environment in which Sir Rod Eddington's inquiry into the east-west tunnel link can be given a tick without creating too much public opposition is at full throttle.

Wayne Kayler-Thompson from the Victorian Chamber of Commerce told The Age last week building that the link was essential to Victoria's liveability. The idea that cities can improve their liveability by building more freeways is risible.

Melbourne lost its title as the world's most liveable city to cities such as Vancouver because the leading cities' transport policies emphasised sustainability, combining excellent public transport with moratoriums on major road projects.

Publicly, the link is being sold as a means of relieving traffic congestion from the eastern suburbs as peak-hour traffic struggles to get off the Eastern Freeway at Hoddle Street and into the city.

Link proponents are at least frank in this respect. They admit finishing EastLink in 2008 will add to that congestion, with another 15,000 cars trying to get into the city in the morning peak.

Thus the east-west tunnel is being sold as a means of redirecting this traffic away from the CBD and in the direction of the western suburbs. The question is does the traffic want to go in this direction? Previous attempts to get the link up foundered on this point as a result of evidence by University of Melbourne town planner Dr Paul Mees, who showed that 9 per cent of the traffic coming off the Eastern Freeway wanted to go to the western suburbs.

It is a view that is accepted by the people who want to put their money into the project. Last week crikey.com reported that in mid-July a Macquarie Bank and Transurban consortium made a secret pitch to the former state treasurer John Brumby for a $3-$4 billion public-private partnership to build and operate a tolled east-west tunnel connecting the eastern suburbs, EastLinkand CityLink.

But according to the report, "as the consortium knows, there is only minimal traffic that actually moves west to east and vice-versa. So to make the project viable, they set the condition for the PPP that at least four and up to eight exit ramps to the Melbourne CBD be allowed."

Consider that for a moment. The tunnel link would go along Alexandra Parade, Princes Street and tunnel-open cut through Melbourne Cemetery, Royal Park and Flemington Road into Racecourse Road. Under the proposal, this would require up to eight exit and entrance ramps across all but two of the following: Hoddle, Wellington, Smith, Brunswick, Nicholson, Rathdowne and Drummond streets, Royal Parade and Flemington and Boundary roads.

And why? As the peak PPP infrastructure lobby group, Infrastructure Partnerships Australia, said in its submission to Sir Rod, the population is expected to grow by about 25 per cent or a million people by 2030 and much of this growth will be in the eastern suburbs.

As the IPA coyly points out, CityLink and the Eastern Freeway are continuing to yield significant traffic volumes with direct consequences for traffic in northern Melbourne, and the Government should consider "traffic problems evident at Hoddle Street, Nicholson Street and Alexandra Parade could be further exacerbated with the opening of EastLink next year".

The project is urgent, says the IPA: "The timing of the project should be sequential to the completion of the EastLink in 2008. The absence of sufficient major projects such as the tunnel in Victoria could result in the dilution of the workforce or its outright relocation to other states or abroad. The situation should be avoided by the progression of the tunnel through approval mechanisms as expeditiously as possible."

But the IPA is concerned an expensive PPP may not be viable without considerable taxpayer subsidies and plenty of exit ramps to allow traffic to go where it wants to go. The IPA wants its cake and eat it at the same time.

In a two-fisted grab for public money as taxpayers and motorists, the IPA claims "there is a compelling case for major Federal Government funding contribution to such a high-profile, nationally significant project.

"It is also vital for the Victorian Government to move quickly with the east-west link project in order to achieve (federal) AusLink 2 funding," it said. "The project is one of national significance and the expeditious conduct of this needs assessment and implementation of its recommendations, will be essential to that end."

The link is a solution to nothing except as a profitable job-creation project for the building industry and a chance for financial engineers in banks such as Macquarie to develop multibillion-dollar tax PPPs to soak up the billions deposited in superannuation funds.

The solution to the problem of CBD congestion that eastern commuters create doesn't require massive amounts of money. It requires a modicum of thought. The only way more people will be able to get into the CBD on the scale envisaged by the proponents of the east-west link is with improved eastern rail transport. Mees points out that in the 1940s daily metropolitan train usage was nearly 200,000 compared with about 150,000 today with a rail system that is larger now. Capacity usage can be increased with better timetabling. But that requires overhauling the system's management including abolishing the failed franchising duopoly, which costs the taxpayer twice as much as when it was public.

Mees points out that all cities with superior liveability have first-class publicly owned public transport. None are considering privatisation.

But what is the IPA's policy? Of course it is to renew the franchises of the private operators when they expire next year. It is a policy that the Brumby Government has apparently adopted. What can one say except poor fella, my city.

http://www.theage.com.au/news/business/driving-down-the-road-of-congestion/2007/08/12/1186857344539.html?page=fullpage#contentSwap1