The owner-operator of Canberra Airport has never lacked for ACT government or business support in its ambition to turn its prime asset into a major regional freight hub and an international gateway. Now it apparently has a powerful patron in Sydney as well; Barry O'Farrell. The NSW Premier said this week rather than develop a second airport in the Sydney Basin to relieve congestion at Kingsford Smith Airport, he would prefer to see Canberra Airport expanded.
Domestic political considerations lie behind Mr O'Farrell's support for Canberra Airport to become, in effect, Sydney's second major airport. The search for a second airport in Sydney goes back to at least the 1980s. However, the highly charged politics has meant a succession of NSW and federal governments (with perhaps the exception of Paul Keating in the early 1990s) have always begged off making a decision.
The consequences of that inaction are now obvious: Kingsford Smith is now operating at full capacity. Shifting regional airlines to Bankstown or some other secondary airport might free up landing slots, but this spare capacity will quickly be soaked up by future traffic growth. As Federal Transport Minister Anthony Albanese says: ''Sydney needs a second airport sooner rather than later.'' With little likelihood that one will be built in the Sydney basin (Mr O'Farrell's government has ultimate planning approval), that leaves Canberra as the obvious candidate - Newcastle is closer to Sydney but shares its runways with RAAF Base Williamtown, an impediment to possible expansion.
Contingent on any decision for a bigger role for Canberra Airport, however, is a high-speed rail link between here and Sydney. The federal government recently completed a study into the feasibility of a very fast train network from Brisbane to Melbourne via Sydney and Canberra, and the various arms of Regional Development Australia (including the ACT and the Hunter) continue to lobby for the opening stage (linking Newcastle, Sydney and Canberra) to be built.
Sydney's airport headache may well prove beneficial to the ACT, but this will only occur if a high-speed rail link exists. Reason enough for Canberra business to consider joining forces with the Hunter in the push for high-speed rail.
A healthy victory
T
he Gillard Labor government has enjoyed some notable legislative successes since coming to power on the back of a loose coalition formed with the Greens and rural independents 17 months ago, but probably none as satisfying as its accomplishment in ending health insurance subsidies for higher-income earners. Ending the health insurance rebate has been a long-standing social objective of Labor's, and the money saved (about $2.4 billion over three years) is expected to be reinvested in the health sector.
The rationale for ending what is often described as a glaring example of ''middle-class welfare'' might seem clear-cut to economists, but a number of commentators have pronounced it a retrograde step likely to reduce efficiencies in private health-care provision, threaten the viability of health funds and lead to greater pressures on an already over-stretched public health-care system.
The accuracy of claims for and against the dismantling of subsidies are difficult to gauge, and complicated by the existence of the Medicare levy surcharge, introduced by the Howard government as a disincentive to high-income earners considering letting their health fund membership lapse. The problem with the levy, according to some health policy experts, is that it has had the effect of inducing a large number of higher-income earners to take up private health insurance, thereby further entrenching Australia's two-tiered health system.
They warn the Gillard government's proposals to increase the levy for high-income earners will exacerbate these existing inequities.
The government has been at pains to stress the money saved from means-testing rebates will remain in health care, but its critics accuse it of having other designs, namely using the money to help underwrite one of Labor's key economic promises: a budget surplus by 2012-13. The government might be preoccupied with managing a narrow parliamentary majority and a prolonged leadership stoush, but that should not preclude it from closer examination of important issues such as the long-term sustainability of the health system, public and private.
.gif)
