Privatization of Rail and Tram Services in Melbourne: What Went Wrong?

@article{Mees2005PrivatizationOR,
  title={Privatization of Rail and Tram Services in Melbourne: What Went Wrong?},
  author={P. Mees},
  journal={Transport Reviews},
  year={2005},
  volume={25},
  pages={433 - 449}
}
  • P. Mees
  • Published 2005
  • Economics
  • Transport Reviews
Melbourne’s urban rail and tram systems were privatized in 1999 using a concessioning or franchising model similar to that employed for British Rail in the 1990s. The Melbourne franchise agreements promised improved services, increased patronage, reduced government subsidies and no real increase in fares. However, within 2 years, it became apparent that these predictions had been over optimistic, and subsequent negotiations saw the departure of one of the three franchisees and a renegotiation… Expand
Melbourne’s public transport: performance and prospects after 15 years of ‘privatisation’
Since the first ‘privatisation’ experiment in 1999, there have been several iterations in the form and content of the franchise contracts for Melbourne’s trains and trams. As decisions about renewingExpand
Franchising And Performance Based Contracts: Lessons From Public Transport In Melbourne
The franchising of train and tram operations in Melbourne has been the subject of a number of papers at THREDBO series conferences. Train and tram services were franchised to private operators inExpand
Urban rail operators in Turkey: Organisational reform in transit service provision and the impact on planning, operation and system performance
Many cities around the world have seen efforts to restructure the provision of public transport. While transit authorities as public agencies continue to deliver transit services in some cities, manyExpand
A Review of Melbourne's Rail Franchising Reforms
This paper reviews Melbourne’s rail franchising to identify lessons learned. The first franchising model sought cost efficiencies following much unionised influence on management. Despite someExpand
Australian and British experiences with competitive tendering in rail operations
Governments typically underwrite public transport, but that funding is significant and growing. Drawing in private-sector expertise, by privatising the services typically does not eliminate the needExpand
Contrasts in Reform: How the Cain and Burke Years Shaped Public Transport in Melbourne and Perth
Melbourne's public transport system, despite its extensive train and tram lines, is facing major challenges. From a point of near-extinction in the late 1970s, Perth's historically smaller publicExpand
Turning over a new franchise: Assessing the current health of public transport management in Melbourne
Melbourne"s unique franchise model for public transport management and service delivery, now a decade old, is a subject of international interest for practitioners and scholars of transport planning.Expand
A marriage of convenience? Rail-supportive transport policies and urban consolidation in station precincts in Australia and Europe
Influenced by the New Urbanism movement and by the sustainability debate questioning the resource efficiency and socioeconomic opportunities of car-based, low-density and functionally segregatedExpand
Infrastructure constraints or poor planning? Increasing service to Melbourne's City Loop/Dandenong rail corridor
There have been repeated claims, from apparently authoritative sources, that Melbourne's rail system is at capacity in peak period, and could not accommodate more train services without theExpand
Rail infrastructure capacity constraints in Melbourne: an engineering problem or a political problem?
It is widely believed that Melbourne's rail system suffers capacity constraints which prevent it providing significantly higher service levels or accommodating higher patronage. The most importantExpand
...
1
2
3
4
5
...

References

SHOWING 1-10 OF 30 REFERENCES
NEW AND DIFFERENT OR THE SAME OLD POLICY? ASSESSING BUS PRIVATISATION IN MELBOURNE
In 1993, the Victorian government privatised most of Melbourne's publicly operated bus services. On the basis of the alleged success of this policy, the remaining public bus services, together withExpand
Performance Based Contract in Public Transportation: The Melbourne Experience
This chapter describes how the franchising of public transport in Victor, Australia, provides a recent example of the need for realistic expectations in regular-provider relationships. The VictorianExpand
Bus deregulation: ten years on
This paper identifies the principal areas of disagreement in the bus policy debate of 1984–85, and reviews the outcome of bus deregulation against that background. It is concluded that the commercialExpand
ATTRACTING PRIVATE FINANCE FOR INFRASTRUCTURE PROJECTS: LESSONS FROM THE CHANNEL TUNNEL RAIL LINK
The development of the Private Finance Initiative in the UK appears to offer much promise of facilitating the government's objective of doubling investment in transport infrastructure. The InitiativeExpand
WHAT CONCLUSIONS CAN BE DRAWN ABOUT BUS DEREGULATION IN BRITAIN
This paper concludes the series on deregulation, updating the statistics presented in the introductory paper to cover the financial year 1994–1995, and output from the National Travel Survey 1992–94Expand
A Very Public Solution: Transport in the Dispersed City
Unlike Europeans, most urban Australians live on far-flung suburban blocks rather than in high-density apartments. Most urban travel is to widespread suburban locations rather than to the cityExpand
Organisational forms and entrepreneurship in public transport: classifying organisational forms
This paper develops two classification frameworks in order to clarify the discussion on regulatory reform in public transport and in order to compare the organisational forms which have appearedExpand
What conclusions can be drawn from bus deregulation in Britain?, Transport
  • Policy,
  • 1997
Kennett’s transport plan a quiet achiever
  • Australian Financial Review,
  • 2002
12) are more optimistic, but their conclusion is based on the Treasury assumption that patronage was increasing at 1% rather than 2% per annum before privatization (see the above discussion)
  • 2003
...
1
2
3
...