SA....go for it! Spend early and spend often.

[Rushby Hinds]

I believe that the SA Govt should bight the bullett, borrow and spend $$ to fund INFRASTRUCTURE for the benefit of SA for the next 100 years.

I can't understand the "not now, wait a few years" approach. The SA Economic position will never be better then it is now. I would happily pay extra state tax if it was being spent on infrastructure

We need

A new Sports stadium, similar to Telstra Dome, close to the city. Scrap AAMI, it's a hole.
A new rail system. Get rid of diesel. Extend the Southern track far enough South so it is still usefull in 30 years. (Same as WA has just done)
Fix up all the hospitals
Fix up all the schools
A North/South freeway
Long term water and power solutions. I'd happily look @ Nuclear Power (if safe)

What else?

[Dirko]

LMAO...
The government in this state has a plan overturned by a council FFS so what chances have they of having the balls and making some of those decisions...

I agree with what you have said, that the infrastructure needs to be put in place. But the last major piece of road infrastructure done in the metro area (Southern Expressway) was f##ked up big time. To re do another two lanes the other way and put a O-Bahn or train line in next door, would cost 100's of millions when if they did it right the first time it would've saved millions on future works and we would've had a road serviceable for the next 50 years not 10...

A inner city sports stadium would be good. NOT move the Hospital. According to the experts they could spend half the amount it will cost to build a new one to get the present site up to scratch.

Look at the tram networks form the bygone era and reintroduce them.

The problem as you said Rushby is that they only look at today and not tomorrow...Foresight people...

[JK]

Whilst I think the new sports stadium would be welcomed and appreciated by all, it's nor really a necessity as such is it? Can't see it happeneing in a hurry, especially given the funds the SANFL and government have both put into AAMI in recent years.

Think your other points should be looked at with more urgency though.

[Andy #24]

Here's some water and power solutions Rushby... use less of them.

Everyone wants a desal plant but they use a huge amount of power. We're trying to reduce greenhouse emmissions but willing to forego this to get more water.

My expert opinion(ha ha) is that renewables show more promise than nuclear. I remember seeing on stateline a chemical cutting technique that increased the size of solar cells by 50 times. There's just not enough money from industry in there to push the idea. Also there's questions over whether nuclear power will reduce emmissions because the uranium needs to be mined. Maybe a wait and see approach here is the best idea as many of Europe's nuclear power plants will be coming towards the end of their lives soon. I remember hearing one Italian or German official saying they were going to move away from nuclear to solar. It would be silly not to learn from their experiences.

Anyway, we can't even get people to agree to a low/mid level waste dump, we're just happy to keep them under the RAH. Nuclear in SA... no hope.

[RustyCage]

None of those will happen, we are Australias backward wowser city. Every country has one, we are Australias. There are too many do-gooder wankers in Adelaide to ensure anything that get proposed will get howled down by some minority group.

[Dirko]

None of those will happen, we are Australias backward wowser city. Every country has one, we are Australias. There are too many do-gooder wankers in Adelaide to ensure anything that get proposed will get howled down by some minority group.

well said !!

[TroyGFC]

We need

A new Sports stadium, similar to Telstra Dome, close to the city. Scrap AAMI, it's a hole.
A new rail system. Get rid of diesel. Extend the Southern track far enough South so it is still usefull in 30 years. (Same as WA has just done)
Fix up all the hospitals
Fix up all the schools
A North/South freeway
Long term water and power solutions. I'd happily look @ Nuclear Power (if safe)

Agreed with all bar last one. I feel we should be looking at using Hydrogen energy from the sea. And build a pipe line from the Kimbulies (?) to pipe water to us- I think this is a more environmental friendly way than a desal plant which will cause other problems with the eco system.

I would also like to see the level crossing on Diagonal Rd made into either a tunnel or bridge to keep traffic travelling freely. Has anyone ever travelled towards Marion SC on a Thursday night around 6pm? I Kaos!! Cars banked up way past Warradale Primary School which is about 2kms away.

[Psyber]

We need

A new Sports stadium, similar to Telstra Dome, close to the city. Scrap AAMI, it's a hole.
A new rail system. Get rid of diesel. Extend the Southern track far enough South so it is still usefull in 30 years. (Same as WA has just done)
Fix up all the hospitals
Fix up all the schools
A North/South freeway
Long term water and power solutions. I'd happily look @ Nuclear Power (if safe)

Agreed with all bar last one. I feel we should be looking at using Hydrogen energy from the sea. And build a pipe line from the Kimbulies (?) to pipe water to us- I think this is a more environmental friendly way than a desal plant which will cause other problems with the eco system.

I would also like to see the level crossing on Diagonal Rd made into either a tunnel or bridge to keep traffic travelling freely. Has anyone ever travelled towards Marion SC on a Thursday night around 6pm? I Kaos!! Cars banked up way past Warradale Primary School which is about 2kms away.

Only catch there is you need a lot of electricity to extract the Hydrogen from water - possibly more than for desalination. Coal powered generators are dirty although John Howard's sequestration plan would help short-term. Solar and wind are just not going to deliver the amount of power needed to be available consistently with reliabilty. So, we are back to nuclear fission or Helium3 fusion [if we can make it work] to supply the Hydrogen.

Only one hitch with the Hydrogen fuel cell for cars - wet roads - assuming we can make the fuel cells affordable and durable.....

Water from the Kimberleys?
1. How do the locals feel about your taking their water?
2. The power required to pump the water has to be generated... back to the cheap, clean, reliable, electricity issue!

[TroyGFC]

I am not 100% against nuclear energy but before going into it they must find a way that can recycle the used rods, surely they can be burnt right up to nothing so that they don't nee to be dumped somewhere, causing other environmental problems for many generations.
Solar energy is an option but it probably uses more energy and more chemicals to produce panels. A few years ago I looked at going solar at home, it was going to cost around $16k to run house and it was calculated that it would take 20 years + for them to pay for themselves. If I owed my house I would do it though but another $16k on my home loan- no thanks!!

[TroyGFC]

Get with it SA
Article from: The Advertiser

ANTHONY KEANE SMART MONEY EDITOR

January 01, 2008 12:30am

ONE of the state's most influential business leaders is urging South Australians to cast aside indecision and act boldly to create a prosperous future.

BankSA managing director Rob Chapman is challenging the state to "get on and do it".

Mr Chapman said businesses' biggest concern was the time it took to get things done, particularly from the state's planning bureaucracy.

His calls emphasise a growing frustration among business at the state's risk-averse and introspective nature.

In an interview with The Advertiser , the chief of the state's biggest bank said a key difference between business and bureaucracy was that business leaders acted decisively.

"We get on and do it, and leaders live and die by the decisions they make," he said. Mr Chapman held up as an example the 18-month debate over the Victoria Park permanent grandstand, which ended with the plan stalling.

"While we hold back on doing things like that, the city will be poorer. It was the chance to make a statement and we didn't," he said. "I must be talking to the wrong people.

"It's mainly business people who share a vision of a South Australia that wants to be prosperous and bold, and we cannot understand the rejection of the proposals."

Mr Chapman, Business SA's immediate past president and the Adelaide Football Club's deputy chairman, said former Victorian premier Jeff Kennett was an example of a leader who "got on and did it".

"And he got it 90 per cent right. You never get it 100 per cent right. You certainly won't please 100 per cent of the people," he said. "Don't try. Just get in and do it. Business will support any persuasion of government that can come in and do those things.

"The Labor Government has been very pro-business. The Liberal Party is now starting to look like an organised Opposition and I take my hat off to Martin Hamilton-Smith, who's shown real leadership qualities."

The state's indecisive character was criticised in a 2003 report by Adelaide thinker-in-residence Charles Landry, a global authority on city futures. Mr Landry said Adelaide needed to "become a 'yes' city rather than a 'maybe' city". He said "even a 'no' city" was better than indecision.

In November, incoming SA Great chairman Nigel McBride said Adelaide tolerated anti-progress attitudes that could hold back future generations.

Former BRL Hardy chief executive Stephen Millar also said a "country bumpkin" attitude was stifling crucial state projects such as the Victoria Park redevelopment.

Mr Chapman said if he was SA's leader, his priorities would be water, population and attracting business. "I would make sure that South Australia is the most competitive place to do business. I'd make sure our payroll taxes were at least competitive, I'd make sure our other levies were competitive, our land taxes are competitive so that businesses want to operate here and stay here, and, hence, employ more people," he said.

He would "drought-proof the state" with a desalination plant, promote the better use of stormwater, expanded reservoirs and a recycling program.

Mr Chapman said he would employ tactics to attract more people to SA, bring back those who had left and attract "the right people" such as skilled migrants.

Premier Mike Rann said there were $48 billion worth of projects in the pipeline in SA.

Opposition Leader Martin Hamilton-Smith said SA needed leadership that would drive infrastructure planning, better education resources and innovation.

"Leadership takes you forward this Premier has taken us backwards," he said.

Maybe they have read this site or Rushby Hinds is ONE of the state's most influential business leaders!

[Psyber]

I am not 100% against nuclear energy but before going into it they must find a way that can recycle the used rods, surely they can be burnt right up to nothing so that they don't nee to be dumped somewhere, causing other environmental problems for many generations.
Solar energy is an option but it probably uses more energy and more chemicals to produce panels. A few years ago I looked at going solar at home, it was going to cost around $16k to run house and it was calculated that it would take 20 years + for them to pay for themselves. If I owed my house I would do it though but another $16k on my home loan- no thanks!!

The half-life of Plutonium 238 is 87.8 years. A fission process with that as the end point may be manageable.
Or perhaps ome of the newer technologies.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thorium_fu ... rium_cycle

EDIT: This reference in the above article is interesting.

http://lpsc.in2p3.fr/gpr/english/NEWNRW ... ml#foot284

[Rushby Hinds]

Get with it SA
Article from: The Advertiser

ANTHONY KEANE SMART MONEY EDITOR

January 01, 2008 12:30am

ONE of the state's most influential business leaders is urging South Australians to cast aside indecision and act boldly to create a prosperous future.

BankSA managing director Rob Chapman is challenging the state to "get on and do it".

Mr Chapman said businesses' biggest concern was the time it took to get things done, particularly from the state's planning bureaucracy.

His calls emphasise a growing frustration among business at the state's risk-averse and introspective nature.

In an interview with The Advertiser , the chief of the state's biggest bank said a key difference between business and bureaucracy was that business leaders acted decisively.

"We get on and do it, and leaders live and die by the decisions they make," he said. Mr Chapman held up as an example the 18-month debate over the Victoria Park permanent grandstand, which ended with the plan stalling.

"While we hold back on doing things like that, the city will be poorer. It was the chance to make a statement and we didn't," he said. "I must be talking to the wrong people.

"It's mainly business people who share a vision of a South Australia that wants to be prosperous and bold, and we cannot understand the rejection of the proposals."

Mr Chapman, Business SA's immediate past president and the Adelaide Football Club's deputy chairman, said former Victorian premier Jeff Kennett was an example of a leader who "got on and did it".

"And he got it 90 per cent right. You never get it 100 per cent right. You certainly won't please 100 per cent of the people," he said. "Don't try. Just get in and do it. Business will support any persuasion of government that can come in and do those things.

"The Labor Government has been very pro-business. The Liberal Party is now starting to look like an organised Opposition and I take my hat off to Martin Hamilton-Smith, who's shown real leadership qualities."

The state's indecisive character was criticised in a 2003 report by Adelaide thinker-in-residence Charles Landry, a global authority on city futures. Mr Landry said Adelaide needed to "become a 'yes' city rather than a 'maybe' city". He said "even a 'no' city" was better than indecision.

In November, incoming SA Great chairman Nigel McBride said Adelaide tolerated anti-progress attitudes that could hold back future generations.

Former BRL Hardy chief executive Stephen Millar also said a "country bumpkin" attitude was stifling crucial state projects such as the Victoria Park redevelopment.

Mr Chapman said if he was SA's leader, his priorities would be water, population and attracting business. "I would make sure that South Australia is the most competitive place to do business. I'd make sure our payroll taxes were at least competitive, I'd make sure our other levies were competitive, our land taxes are competitive so that businesses want to operate here and stay here, and, hence, employ more people," he said.

He would "drought-proof the state" with a desalination plant, promote the better use of stormwater, expanded reservoirs and a recycling program.

Mr Chapman said he would employ tactics to attract more people to SA, bring back those who had left and attract "the right people" such as skilled migrants.

Premier Mike Rann said there were $48 billion worth of projects in the pipeline in SA.

Opposition Leader Martin Hamilton-Smith said SA needed leadership that would drive infrastructure planning, better education resources and innovation.

"Leadership takes you forward this Premier has taken us backwards," he said.

Maybe they have read this site or Rushby Hinds is ONE of the state's most influential business leaders!

Funnily enough, i used to work with Rob Chapman at a previous employer for both of us.

[Hondo]

A new sports stadium would be nice but surely that's a luxury if put ahead of the other things on the list

[Rushby Hinds]

Spoken like a true South Australian Hondo


Let's wait until everything is perfect"

[TroyGFC]

I am not 100% against nuclear energy but before going into it they must find a way that can recycle the used rods, surely they can be burnt right up to nothing so that they don't nee to be dumped somewhere, causing other environmental problems for many generations.
Solar energy is an option but it probably uses more energy and more chemicals to produce panels. A few years ago I looked at going solar at home, it was going to cost around $16k to run house and it was calculated that it would take 20 years + for them to pay for themselves. If I owed my house I would do it though but another $16k on my home loan- no thanks!!

The half-life of Plutonium 238 is 87.8 years. A fission process with that as the end point may be manageable.
Or perhaps ome of the newer technologies.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thorium_fu ... rium_cycle

EDIT: This reference in the above article is interesting.

http://lpsc.in2p3.fr/gpr/english/NEWNRW ... ml#foot284

Too much reading there Psyber, I will have to wait until back at work to print it out as hate reading more than a few lines on the net!!

[am Bays]

Footy Park is a great stadium IMHO. If you want to spend money on a more accessible sports stadium put in a rail spur to Footy Park (advantages the Western suburbs 365 days not a sports stadium used 70-80 days a year) and develop roll out seats so you can convert it into a square seating stadium for the minor sport soccer.

I suggest seats attached to a stable lightweight aluminium bases in sections that can be interlocked and bolted together (move in move out). They need to be attached to a stable base and interlocked so that the soccer fans with rioteous tendancies (melb victory fans, Hellas v Juve fans, liverpool vs Juve fans) can't start throwing tehm around when they feel like it.

We have good sports facilities in Adelaide improve those and make them more accessible before we build new ones.

[TroyGFC]

I tend to sort of agree with Tassie -trainline to FOOTY pk as there is alot of other things that should be spent on besides a sports stadium. Though a city stadium like Dockland would bring sports fans off the couch.

[redden whites]

Have millions poured into a footy stadium and have a mid 30's crowd turn up to a game when both teams based in Adelaide play each other .I certainly hope not.Also Adelaide based AFL teams have a dismal record of turning up to home finals also.Put the money elsewhere I say.The amount already poured into Footy park has been more than enough contribution as far as I am concerned.

[Psyber]

...Too much reading there Psyber, I will have to wait until back at work to print it out as hate reading more than a few lines on the net!!

Fair enough - I read a hell of a lot faster on paper rather than on a screen too!

New Stadium issue:
I think that would be a low priority.
Better transport to, from, and around, West Lakes would make sense.
Perhaps there could be a deal about better use of Adelaide Oval instead as an extra venue if one is needed. Surely Cricket doesn't raise enough money!

[Rushby Hinds]

Agree that the Stadium is not as important as everything else, but I say "stuff it, let's have the bloody lot"


1980TM, AAMI stadium is woeful. So is Subiaco, which was presumably built around the same time.

Perth to Mandurah line takes first passengers


Posted Sun Dec 23, 2007 3:46pm AEDT

http://www.abc.net.au/news/stories/2007/12/23/2126312.htm



The WA Government hopes the opening of the new line will reduce the number of cars using the Kwinan Freeway. (File photo) (User submitted: Peter Major)
The first passengers to travel along the new Perth to Mandurah railway line have arrived at their destination.

Premier Alan Carpenter, Infrastructure Minister Alannah MacTiernan and 1,500 passengers were on board the inaugural train journey, which left Perth bound for Mandurah at 9:00am AWDT.

About 1,000 onlookers greeted the train's arrival at Mandurah after watching the journey on a big screen.

The $1.3 billion southern rail line is expected to carry 50,000 passengers a day and reduce the number of cars using the Kwinan Freeway by 20,000.
There is free travel on the line for passengers today

Stadium deal done as footy sees light

19th December 2007, 12:00 WST







WA will almost certainly get an $850 million world-class stadium at Kitchener Park after the AFL yesterday struck an historic agreement with the State Government that will see football leave Subiaco Oval.

The breakthrough was struck after the WA Football Commission, which has claimed it would lose money by being part of a 60,000-seat multipurpose stadium it did not control, accepted a Government guarantee which would ensure it was not worse off.

McGinty denies cost blow-out on new hospital
Posted Fri Nov 2, 2007 10:11am AEDT

WA Health Minister Jim McGinty says Perth's new hospital can - and will - be built for $1.1 billion dollars. (ABC)


Western Australia's Health Minister Jim McGinty says plans for Perth's new state of the art hospital will forge ahead and he has disputed claims of a cost blowout.

It has been reported the cost of the Fiona Stanley Hospital project in the southern suburb of Murdoch has soared to $1.8 billion, $700 million more than expected.

The Opposition's Health Spokesman Kim Hames says the Government has underestimated the cost of the project from the beginning.

"It seems to me that Labor can't manage our existing health system and now it looks as though they can't manage our proposed new health system either," he said.

Mr Hames believes the price tag for the Fiona Stanley Hospital could soar past the $2 billion mark.

Mr McGinty says the hospital can - and will - be built for $1.1 billion dollars.

He says the additional $700 million refers to extras like more operating theatres which were called for by stakeholders, including doctors and nurses.

Mr McGinty says more operating theatres and increased floor space have been called for but says not all requests will be met.

"We could build a hospital for $1.1 billion, I'm absolutely confident about that," he said.

"Would we get the best hospital in Australia? Probably not. That's why we are looking at all these other options."

These articles are from the last two months!

About 20 years ago SA and WA had very similar economic and financial positions.