Chief Minister Jon Stanhope is absolutely right. Canberra does need to be linked by a very fast train.
It defies logic that this city is so poorly serviced by rail, both in terms of service frequency and journey time. Two trains a day is a joke.
Although as desolate Canberra Station more resembles a 1970s regional amenities block than a national capital railway station that is probably a good thing.
As a test I caught the late Saturday afternoon train to Sydney a week ago. While the refurbished railcars were comfortable it was a 4.5 hour journey, due to trackwork, at a cost of $40. The equivalent road journey takes three hours and is about the same price in fuel and tolls.
When I lived in London 10 years ago I would regularly take the Eurostar to Paris for the weekend and be there in two and a half hours. An easy and seamless journey made possible by great vision and without the hassle of airport travel.
As a new resident of this city I reckon Canberra is the long-term answer to Sydney's congestion and growth, and to a lesser extent Melbourne's..
Canberra Airport is also potentially the solution to the Sydney Airport conundrum too.
A high-speed rail link would easily make both cities a commutable option especially with a 60 minute journey time.
Any link into Canberra has to be electric, underground and via the airport, Civic, the Parliamentary Triangle and Woden. That is expensive.
At the Sydney end the train must service both airport terminals to be workable and a new underground alignment would be necessary to take trains past Central and under Martin Place.
With underground access being reserved for the Sydney Metro project this needs to be worked through now as a project of national significance.
The very fast train will make an enormous contribution to local economies through construction, employment and tourism. It will also give Canberra greater purpose, allowing more people to live, work and raise a family in Australia's National Capital. Their capital.
Andrew Heslop, Kingston
It was Alan Wrigley, when a Deputy Secretary at Defence, who pointed out that when the armed services ran out of arguments for a pet project they would claim that not to proceed would be bad for morale.
Now we have an editorial (July 14) claiming that the very fast train would reduce global warming.
In 1991 it was clear that even using the most optimistic figure put out by the consortium that the VFT would not even cover its own interest costs let alone make a profit.
Indeed the Access Economics report commissioned by the VFT consortium showed that it might only be profitable if road and air transport was not deregulated.
Both are now deregulated. It is disingenuous to claim that it did not proceed because the Government would not agree to the tax demands of the Consortium because these proposed imposing extra taxes on those living along the route ie those at most detriment by the train.
Any increase in land values would be in fact in concentric circles around the stations.
There was never any serious intent to move freight by the VFT. Why pay huge amounts to get a freight container from Sydney to Canberra in one hour rather than three and a half?
The sensible way to reduce freight on the roads is to improve conventional rail track and rolling stock, not make yet another money pit which draining public purse such as the Ord River Scheme or the Alice Springs-Darwin rail line.
John Coochey, Chisholm
Email a friend