Home > Economic policy > Rail asset sale to pay for rail liabilities

Rail asset sale to pay for rail liabilities

October 31st, 2010

The Bligh government has announced that a substantial amount of money (about $200 million) derived from the sale of QR’s highly profitable coal business will be used to upgrade heavily subsidised passenger rail services between Brisbane and Cairns, correctly described by the Transport Minister as a “luxury” service. In this case the rhetoric of the Premier and Treasurer, spurious when applied to the income-generating coal freight service, is absolutely correct – every dollar spent on new tilt trains is a dollar that can’t be spent on schools and hospitals.

Hat-tip: David Adamson

Categories: Economic policy Tags:
  1. fredn
    October 31st, 2010 at 18:19 | #1

    Well the federal Labor party spent a lot of money on schools and look at the crap they had to wade through for that good deed. “The Australian” still goes on about it.

  2. Highlander
    October 31st, 2010 at 18:45 | #2

    Well, look on the bright side – every dollar not earned from the money-making asset that is QR is money we can spend on a sports event no-one cares about!

  3. Ben
    October 31st, 2010 at 19:33 | #3

    So when is the next Qld elections.

    Time to throw out the garbage :?:

    But what is the alternative.

  4. Hal9000
    November 1st, 2010 at 08:16 | #4

    It’s all about keeping the thousand rollingstock engineering workers in Maryborough employed until after the election, Prof Q. They’ll all be sacked then, because the privatised QR will be buying waggons from China, but the short term problem will have been fixed, and isn’t that the only issue that counts with this government?

  5. paul walter
    November 1st, 2010 at 13:10 | #5

    Highlander, patent that and you’ll make a motzah. And the others, esp Hal9000.
    (B) lying scum they are.

  6. brad
    November 2nd, 2010 at 13:04 | #6

    Well surely it doesn’t matter it if it is a luxury service, or a service that will only benefit a few. If it improves a service that makes money, then surely that is of benefit to the whole state anyway?

Comments are closed.