Inland Rail is a multi-billion dollar project aimed at extending the existing inland railway line that currently runs between Melbourne and Parkes, and up to Brisbane. This will be a combination of existing and new sections of rail. The idea is to have a north south connection between Brisbane and Melbourne that can shift hundreds of thousands of movement from road to rail freight. This line will need to be upgraded to accommodate double-stacked container trains that are 1.8 km long.
One Nation supports rail transport over road transport, but for this to be effective, the rail service must reflect the needs of the industry. This means trains need to depart according to industry schedules, reliable connections need to be maintained, and fair pricing offered. Inland Rail, in its current form, will provide none of those things. The current alignment (route) in QLD takes the line across the Condamine floodplain, which is, quite frankly, a stupid idea. The deep clay soil in that area cannot support a railway line without horrendously expensive supports, which will then act as a dam during a flood. The Brisbane Port access is constrained, meaning the railway line across Brisbane and into the Port is running close to capacity, with no easy way to extend it. The Port of Gladstone offers a much better option. The line can go inland up the Mooney Highway, then through Wandoan to Banana and onwards to Gladstone. This direct, flood-free alignment will provide a cheaper and more reliable transit option.
A new container handling facility is being built in Gladstone, with an intermodal connection to the railway. Gladstone is perfectly positioned to serve as Australia’s gateway port for container traffic from Asia. Best of all, the Port is located away from the city and is strongly supported by local councils. Despite inquiring about this option, it appears the floodplain alignment remains the preferred option. This is not good enough! One Nation will continue to campaign for Inland Rail to run through to the Port of Gladstone.
Transcript
Senator ROBERTS: Thank you for being here again. I have a number of questions, but I think they’re fairly short and straightforward. Recommendation 1 of the Schott report into the ARTC was to address skills deficiencies in the ARTC. I note that you’ve hired a new chair, Mr Peter Duncan. Has Mr Duncan ever built a railway?
Mr Johnson: Mr Duncan is the chair of the board. His skills go to requisite skills to be able to lead a board and our organisation. He is certainly familiar with long linear infrastructure, the engineering infrastructure. He’s very familiar with that from his prior roles.
Senator ROBERTS: What sort of long—
Mr Johnson: Roads and water. It’s really not a matter for me to comment on the appointment of other directors and Mr Duncan in a role. What I would say is that the board are working really well with myself and holding me to account to make sure we’ve got the requisite skills to operate, maintain and create the network. Further to the recommendations, a key recommendation from Dr Schott’s report and the review was the establishment of the Inland Rail subsidiary and the establishment of the board in parallel. That’s why we sit here today. Nick is the new CEO to Inland Rail. That subsidiary is now fully fledged. They have both a chair and a board in place for the construction of Inland Rail.
Senator ROBERTS: Thank you. I appreciate and understand the distinctions between governance, management and trusteeship, if you like. He has not built a railway, but he has done other long infrastructure. The other new senior hire is Dr Collette Burke, who is a qualified engineer. Can you confirm her engineering qualification, please?
Mr Johnson: I know that Collette is an esteemed and qualified engineer, but I don’t have those details in front of me.
Senator ROBERTS: Could we get it on notice, please?
Mr Johnson: No problem.
Senator ROBERTS: There are reports—these may be old—that Dr Burke is also contributing to the Marinus Link from Tasmania to Victoria and Snowy Hydro 2.0. At these still current appointments?
Mr Johnson: Like all directors, Collette as a director on the board has made clear what other commitments she has and whether are any conflicts at play. I can confirm that is the case.
Senator ROBERTS: So she is still on the other two boards?
Mr Johnson: Yes.
Senator ROBERTS: Minister, has the government made any other appointments to ARTC that address the skills deficiencies identified in the Schott report?
Senator Carol Brown: I don’t have that information with me, but I can take it on notice.
Mr Miller: Of course there’s a secondary board now, the subsidiary board of Inland Rail, whose directors all have extensive infrastructure experience.
Senator ROBERTS: In the earlier discussion on Inland Rail, I asked about what has been called the Goondiwindi to Gladstone alignment. I was advised that this is in the hands of the Queensland government. I find that surprising, when the Commonwealth government is paying for the project. It sounds like the Queensland government is going to decide how the Commonwealth spends the money. The Goondiwindi to Gladstone route is substantially cheaper, and I know there is at least one private partnership trying to get the attention of government with extensive expertise in railroads, freight, construction and shipping. They have money to spend. They’re willing to make a commitment, especially on the Surat Basin link from Moranbah to Banana. I don’t understand why, when the government is juggling budget deficits moving forward, it’s proving so hard to get even a meeting about a public-private partnership happening on this alternative route.
Mr Johnson: Just to be really clear, there are a few things happening there in parallel. Inland Rail Pty Ltd, headed by Nick, are continuing the work around the design of the route that heads over the Toowoomba range to Ebenezer, and working closely with the National Intermodal company on the connection at Ebenezer. That’s what Inland Rail are focused on. I am aware that there is some early business case development for other alternative options—Goondiwindi or Toowoomba to Gladstone—that the Queensland government have had some insight into.
Senator ROBERTS: So both Goondiwindi to Gladstone and Toowoomba to Gladstone are being considered as alternative business cases?
Mr Johnson: I have heard that both are. That’s right. I am acutely aware of the private interest that you’ve mentioned, and we’ve made it clear to the proponent—as we would for anyone who was interested in either developing, adjoining or working around the network, given we’re really the national rail network manager—that, when they get to the point that they’re at an EIS, an environmental impact statement, we’d be happy to support what type of views or impacts that would have, in a practical sense, and suggest what they might consider in that input. We have met, so I’m a little bit lost with the statement that it’s hard to get that meeting.
Senator ROBERTS: So you’ve already been working with them?
Mr Johnson: We’ve had a couple of meetings about what we can do at different stages, as they progress their development, to offer them whatever practical support we can, as we would for any other adjoining infrastructure manager.
Senator ROBERTS: So would you be willing to meet with a private investor who’s willing to fund the railroad construction from Surat Basin, from Moranbah to Banana?
Mr Johnson: We meet with a number of proponents. That one is a long way from our network, but nationally we’ve met with a number of people who are looking at different things, mostly where it’s connected to our network.
Senator ROBERTS: How about Inland Rail? Would you be willing to meet the investor to consider this?
Mr Miller: We’d be willing to meet to assist with indicative pricing that we have experienced per kilometre. It’s outside our scope in terms of our current remit. We’re going from border to Toowoomba and then down to Kagaru, and that’s where our focus is, around the environmental approvals and land acquisition, at present.
Senator ROBERTS: That’s the vast majority of the cost of Inland Rail—from Toowoomba to Brisbane—as I understand it.
Mr Miller: It’s a significant part of Inland Rail. It’s not the vast majority.
Senator ROBERTS: Okay. We can argue about that at another time. Does the ARTC have any other publicprivate partnerships in place for Inland Rail? By ‘private’, I mean actually contributing private funding to the project.
Mr Johnson: No. The private partnership contract has ceased.
Senator ROBERTS: Thank you. Does the ARTC have any signed agreements in the Queensland leg of Inland Rail? If so, which?
Mr Miller: Signed agreements?
Senator ROBERTS: Yes.
Mr Miller: With agencies or—
Senator ROBERTS: Any agreements committing Inland Rail to—
Mr Miller: Yes, we do. We have multiple land agreements in place. We are well developed with our environmental approvals.
Senator ROBERTS: That’s for the Toowoomba to Ebenezer route?
Mr Miller: That’s from the border to Toowoomba—the Gowrie route.
Senator ROBERTS: Across the Condamine?
Mr Miller: Across the Condamine. We expect to be in a position to go to public exhibition No. 2 in the last quarter of this year with that EIS approval.
Senator ROBERTS: What’s the sunk cost of Inland Rail specifically for the Queensland sections? You can do that on notice.
Mr Miller: I will do that on notice. I can advise the Senate that to date—or to the end of March—we have spent $4.3 billion on the entire program.
Senator ROBERTS: In Queensland?
Mr Miller: No, across the entire program.
Senator ROBERTS: Okay. Could I have the—
Mr Miller: The sunk cost for Queensland?
Senator ROBERTS: Yes, please. The rail line from Ebenezer to the port of Brisbane is constrained. The available capacity on that line does not allow for the volume of freight necessary to ever get the construction costs back. The cost of the tunnel down the mountain is without a doubt $20 million, and it won’t be necessary if the rail line terminates in the port of Gladstone. Are they considerations you’re working on in the back of your mind?
Mr Miller: Our current scope of work is to take double-stack container trains to Ebenezer, and then they are transitioned to single-stack to Kagaru. That’s our scope.
Senator ROBERTS: Okay. I don’t understand why this economic reality has not been seized upon to reset the planning towards the Goondiwindi to Gladstone route, with freight destined for the airport at Wellcamp coming down from the Miles intermodal to Wellcamp. Are you considering that as part of the alternative?
Mr Miller: We’re not considering an alternative, but what we are considering is getting the environmental approvals and land acquisition to Toowoomba as a priority, and we’re continuing with the Kagaru section, with three EISs concurrently in that space.
Senator ROBERTS: You’re aware of the massive concerns about the Condamine crossing?
Mr Miller: Yes, we are, and we’ve undertaken very significant hydrological studies. Those studies have been to a flood panel and have been accepted as part of the EIS process.
Senator ROBERTS: What about the foundations for the elevated section of that line, which will be fairly lengthy?
Mr Miller: Yes, there is going to be an elevated section through the Condamine to improve resilience and reliability during flood periods.
Senator ROBERTS: Are you aware of the cost?
Mr Miller: We are working through the costs. The costs will be subject to the conditions that, ultimately, the EIS from the Coordinator-General’s office in Queensland puts upon us, plus the timeline, in terms of when that’s going to be built with inflation and the like, and the design and geotech that’s going on. We’re also doing some embankment trials in that area to ascertain what settlement impacts there will be, and what that means from an engineering perspective, so we can more accurately define the cost and scope.
Senator ROBERTS: Minister, the outcome of this review by ARTC and the Queensland government of the Queensland leg, in my opinion, must lead to the abandonment of the Condamine floodplain crossing of this railway line; otherwise the railway line won’t be built. That’s my opinion. I’d like to know your feedback on that. What are you getting in the way of reassurance from Inland Rail?
Senator Carol Brown: We take our advice from the experts.
Senator ROBERTS: Are they outside Inland Rail or inside?
Senator Carol Brown: Thank you for your view.
Senator ROBERTS: Are you getting experts from inside Inland Rail, as well as outside Inland Rail, especially on the Condamine crossing?
Senator Carol Brown: We get our expert opinions from Inland Rail, as well as our departmental people, but thank you for your view. I’ll pass it on.
Thank You Senator Roberts for raising these issues.
For Inland Rail to cross the Condamine Floodplain would be a disaster. The Black Soil plains become impassable after rain, and these are not just any freight cars, but double-stacked ones. Subsidence would be a problem. There’s no point in building another Oodnadatta/Alice Springs railway, and having to reroute it later.
Inland Rail literature does not mention electrification. Yet this may be forced on the project by the goal of “Net Zero”, because “Green Hydrogen” and “Green Ammonia” are unproven for heavy freight. There should be a requirement that tunnels, bridges etc allow for future electrification. Double-stacked electric freight trains already operate in India and some other countries.
The East-West double-stacked freight line should also allow for future electrification.
Inland Rail is currently building only a SINGLE-TRACK line. Surely this is short-sighted.
In addition to Inland Rail as a heavy freight line, we need a new line from Cairns to Brisbane to Sydney and Melbourne, for general freight and passengers. It should be electrified at 25 kv AC, as Qld & WA use.
The North Coast line in NSW from Maitland to Brisbane is single-track and winding. The Qld line from Nambour to Cairns is single-track. Both should be replaced with 25 kv AC double-track standard gauge lines.
A new dual track standard-gauge line should be built from Brisbane to Nambour, connecting with the current narrow-gauge terminus at Nambour, and thence dual gauge to Cairns.
25 kv AC trains cannot run on the 1.5kv DC suburban and interurban lines surrounding Sydney and Melbourne. I suggest that a new 25 kv AC line be built from Maitland to Wisemans Ferry, along the Old Northern Road, and enter Sydney via Dural. That route is not mountainous or steep.
During World War II, a huge Public Works program was implemented in Australia, overseen by Ted Theodore. It’s wonderful how the threat of invasion can change what’s deemed possible or fundable.
Gladstone Port is the most intelligent destination for Inland Rail. Incorporating g Passenger carriages makes a whole lot of sense too.
Malcolm, it seems to me that the whole scheme is bogged down by the trans Condamine route plus the Toowoomba range and then the stupidity of not taking the double-deckers right to the port of Brisbane. It appears there are people or entities actively working against getting this visionary idea finalized, clearly the Qld government is not convinced it’s a goer. Perhaps the likely new government will be more supportive, but it’s the environmentally activist public service that has to be convinced to back it.
Whilst I would love to see more heavy-duty freight and passenger train lines in SE Qld, our experience in the sunshine coast is that a Labor government hung up by Brisbane centric issues will never voluntarily fund such commuter services, there is too much green-thinking anti-growth mentality behind the scenes cruelling such developments. So, the Gladstone port line extension would be super for the region and open up further Surat Basin coal fields, but the Brisbanites don’t care for that. Obviously, we need better governments with some vision that is not tarred by stupid climate/ alternative energy concerns meaning they won’t support new heavy industry and mining export growth in the regions.
I’m glad you raised the problem of the unsuitable Condamine flood plain. The rail line from Moura to Gladstone had many problems in the Orange creek area, because of the unsuitable soil. The coal from Springsure could not be taken via Moura because of the unsuitable soils in the Theodore area. The line heads north to the Blackwater line to avoid the floodplain. If the inland rail is built it will need to be very stable because of the plan to double stack containers on wagons. The first wagons built for the Moura rail line were quite high. This created quite a lot of problems. Any small depression that formed in the track was a major problem. All wagons used in Queensland now days have a much lower profile, and are wider to keep the centre of gravity low. This drastically reduces the maintenance costs, and allows for higher speeds. Check out the difference in sway, with a 50mm hole in the track, between a single and a double stack container. You will be surprised at the result.