Scott Morrison Rolls Out $2bn High Speed Rail Proposal


Prime minister Scott Morrison has thrown federal support behind two major fast rail proposals, committing $40 million in funding for five new business cases as part of its wider plan to connect Australia’s capitals to regional centres.


High-speed trains would travel at speeds of up to 200km/hr, cutting the Melbourne to Geelong commute to just 32 minutes, while Brisbane to the Gold Coast would take just 35 minutes.

At a press conference in Melbourne on Friday, the prime minister promised $2 billion in investment for the Geelong-Melbourne fast rail service. The Victorian government would need to match the $2 billion federal contribution for the project to be viable.

Minister for Urban Infrastructure Alan Tudge joined the prime minister and treasurer Josh Frydenberg at the announcement on Friday, saying construction on the Geelong-Melbourne link could begin in as little as 18 months.

“This is all part of our plan to manage population growth [t]o take the pressure off our big cities like Melbourne and make our regional cities like Geelong even more attractive places to live and work,” prime minister Scott Morrison said.


Related: High Time for High Speed Inland Rail

Victorian transport infrastructure minister Jacinta Allan said that the Geelong-Melbourne connection would cost at least $10 billion, much more than the $4 billion the government has estimated.

Victorian transport infrastructure minister Jacinta Allan said that the Geelong-Melbourne connection would cost at least $10 billion, much more than the $4 billion the government has estimated.Jacinta Allan MP / Twitter.
The prime minister also flagged plans for a “congestion busting” Gold Coast to Brisbane link.Gold Coast-based federal member Karen Andrews said that a fast rail link will reduce commuter travel times and get people off the M1.

“Easing the commute from the Gold Coast to Brisbane is something I’ve long fought for.

“Improving rail connectivity will complement the work happening to upgrade the M1 to get people home to their loved ones sooner, boost productivity and create jobs.”

High speed rail between Brisbane and the Sunshine Coast is already on the cards, with the Queensland project securing business case funding from the Turnbull government in early 2018.

Among other fast rail election promises, shadow infrastructure minister Anthony Albanese pledged $2.8 billion in funding for a high-speed inland rail link from Melbourne to Brisbane.

While the Berejiklian government identified at least four potential high-speed routes within 300 kilometres of Sydney in December.

In its 2018 budget, the Andrews’ government announced $50 million of funding to develop a business case for the Geelong to Melbourne link.

If elected, the Coalition said it will create a National Fast Rail Agency to guide the work and determine priorities for the construction and funding of the projects.

The government committed to five fast rail business cases: Brisbane to Gold Coast; Melbourne to Albury Wodonga; Melbourne to Traralgon; Sydney to Wollongong and Sydney to Parkes.

The government committed to five fast rail business cases: Brisbane to Gold Coast; Melbourne to Albury Wodonga; Melbourne to Traralgon; Sydney to Wollongong and Sydney to Parkes.



Photo:  Herald Sun

HSR enabling Developers Rezoning Farmlands for House and Land Packages for Overseas Buyers in Our Regions?


LOOK at the Who’s Who of those “on the make” revealed here … and as previously shared with you … Consolidated Land and Rail Australia (CLARA) has robbed Beyond Zero Emissions (BZE) of its development of HSR connecting Melbourne, Sydney, Newcastle and Brisbane … it was what we all wanted to replace a polluting second airport at Badgery’s Creek.

CLARA is about “Value Capture” …  a $200B dream of an entrepreneur from NSW Southern Highlands, Nick Cleary who has assembled a consortium of Hitachi, GE and a board including Andrew Robb (sold our Darwin Port), Barry O’Farrell, Steve Bracks, and teams at RMIT and CSIRO working on designs for “smart cities”

Join the dots with the Scomo Government push for migrants/visa holders for the regions … and with ever more foreign students 

More farmlands to be rezoned for house and land packages for foreign buyers … will the NSW Legislation for compulsory acquisition and land amalgamation come into force?  So much for the environment … zip …

To find out more also view:

Bennelong MP John Alexander Magic Bullet … 15 MILLION Mega City from Newcastle to Nowra


P.S. vote them out …

How high-speed rail would affect prices and spark investment in regional centres

By Ingrid Fuary-Wagner
12 Dec 2018 


A high-speed rail network out of Sydney would spark significant investment and population growth driving up property prices by up to 25 per cent, say developers and business interests already positioning themselves for the growth.

In the lead-up to a state election in 2019, the NSW government recently announced its vision for four potential high-speed rail corridors from Sydney – to Orange, Nowra, Canberra and Newcastle – that would improve connectivity and cut travel time to regional centres up to 75 per cent.

The Labor opposition supports a fast rail between Canberra and Sydney as well, while its Victorian counterpart has opted to spend $50 billion on a suburban rail network in Melbourne.

A high-speed connection from Sydney to Canberra via a second Sydney airport and Goulburn would allow commuters to get between the two cities in an hour, while a trip from Sydney to Newcastle would take 45 minutes and half an hour to Wollongong.

David Borger says such a project would drive investment around regional hubs and designated Sydney stations. Brook_Mitchell

Sydney-based developer Colin Curran, chief executive of Maxiwealth Holdings, said property prices and demand in Goulburn would increase significantly if the high-speed rail went ahead.

“[Prices] could increase by as much as 25 per cent in the initial period, which would push a standard block from $260,000 up to over $300,000 or $350,000 – but you’d still be well under the prices of Sydney,” he said.

Investment hotspots

But while developers would probably jump at the opportunity to invest in Goulburn, Mr Curran said there was not a lot of land available and it would be up to the council to rezone it.

Mr Curran is already ahead of the curve having noticed the potential of the regional town several years ago. He has several projects in Goulburn under way, including house and land packages with an affordable housing component, as well as a proposal for a mixed-use development with 30 apartments and a childcare centre .

“Goulburn is our main focus, I think it’s got a lot of potential, especially once this train is planned and it goes past the new Badgerys Creek airport,” he said.

Adam Murchie, director of real estate investment firm Forza Capital, said proximity to strong public transport infrastructure such as high-speed rail would be a major driver of residential and commercial offices, and land in and around transport nodes like Goulburn or Lithgow would become “hugely beneficial”.

A fast-train link could cut travel time from Sydney to Canberra from four hours to one hour.

Mr Murchie also identified Canberra, Wollongong and Newcastle as potential investment hotspots, citing the universities in each city as a key driver.

“You’d be unlocking those areas in the way of the rail infrastructure and creating a framework that allows people to remain in those areas,” Mr Murchie said. “With increasing pressure for universities to commercialise the research that they are doing, a lot of people [who have studied or worked at a university] tend to stay in those areas”.

Mr Murchie said a high-speed rail network could take the pressure off Sydney housing and property prices, depending on how much demand was shifted to regional locations.

“[A fast-rail network] could get house prices in Sydney closer back to the point of equilibrium, in terms of keeping price growth constrained, not zero, but fairer so your price growth marries up with economic and wages growth,” he said.

There are four potential high-speed train lines out of Sydney the NSW government will investigate. Supplied

While a fast-rail network could take some pressure of housing constraints and affordability in Sydney, property in those regional hubs and around earmarked Sydney stations would become more expensive as demand increased.

“The places within an hour or hour and a half of Sydney would have the biggest increase in values, and [it would become less affordable] for people living in Sydney who are close to those high-speed rail stops, which would be the catalyst for residential and potentially commercial office development because they are accessible to a wider workforce,” town planner and Western Sydney director of the Sydney Business Chamber David Borger said.

Wollongong connection

Mr Borger anticipates developers and investors would start to reserve and acquire land around those corridors and stations earmarked for a high-speed rail ahead of time if there were certainty around the project.

“The important thing is the market will respond to certainty and if lines could be locked in early and the market can be given a degree of confidence it could actually happen you might see some investment starting to occur before the public transport is delivered,” Mr Borger said.

It currently takes about four hours on the train from Sydney to Canberra. Graham Tidy

Improving connectivity between Sydney and Wollongong would not only encourage more residents to move to the coastal city but would see an increase in investment flows and businesses relocating there too, according to Wollongong City Council economic development manager Mark Grimson.

“One of the unique features of Wollongong is that we have a large commuter pool so we have a ready-made workforce. There are 9000 white-collar managers and professionals commuting to Sydney every day and 300 CEOs and general managers. If you improved connectivity between Sydney and Wollongong there’s no doubt it would also make it more attractive to have your business located here,” he said.

Mr Grimson said there had been $1.3 billion of investment in Wollongong’s CBD in the past five years and a high-speed rail connection would see that grow even further.

More businesses would move to Wollongong if there was a faster train connection, Wollongong City Council economic development manager Mark Grimso says. JohnCarnemolla




GREEN FIELDS AND BLUE SKY … Is Nick Cleary’s ambitious CLARA project the answer to Australia’s fast-rail question?


CLARA sounds good but it has taken away from BZE. Clara is about “Value Capture” ….

Community Action Alliance for NSW shared a post.  January 14, 2017



BEGS the question WHY doesn’t the Turnbull Govt pursue Beyond Zero Emissions?

BUT what we are experiencing in this Nation and especially in NSW is a transfer … a pipeline of our Public Assets to private interests with some $130 Billion worth of public assets sold off in NSW alone!

Note with the LNP way it ties in with their population Ponzi scheme and higher density …

CAAN has touched on this topic from time to time, and we offer some “food for thought” … it comes back to the “Culture which is established at the very Top” ..

Value Capture is about billing the people who get the benefit of the Infrastructure Project contrary to those in its path with Compulsory Acquisition, and being shortchanged on the market value of their properties.

WILL the “I am not a Totalitarian Government” tax those that get the benefits to give it to the people who lose their homes or businesses?

A prime example of this is WestCONnex during the construction phase of 2 – 5 years the victims have lost $Millions!

Sydney Metro accused of ‘unfair pressure tactics’ in acquiring homes
Property owners undergoing compulsory acquisition told compensation offers expire in 21 days


VALUE CAPTURE … it’s pernicious … it’s saying to everyone in the community “I have got this idea and I am going to make you pay for my idea”!



“The Greens have concerns about information absent from today’s announced CLARA proposal, apparently due to “commercial in confidence” considerations.

“Being asked to ‘just trust us’ is not good enough for a project of this scale.”

Australian Government releases Value Capture Discussion Paper
November 20, 2016

USING ‘value capture’ to help deliver more infrastructure is the subject of a discussion paper released last week by Urban Infrastructure Minister Paul Fletcher and Assistant Minister for Cities and Digital Transformation Angus Taylor.

The discussion paper examines the potential to more widely use value capture funding to supplement the billions of dollars each year already spent by all three levels of Australian governments on infrastructure.

Read more:





Paddy Manning


Photo by Paddy Manning

Is Nick Cleary’s ambitious CLARA project the answer to Australia’s fast-rail question?

It’s the second-last “Joker Poker” raffle night at the Doodle Cooma Arms, and the crowd’s getting happily sozzled. For now the bistro is flat out serving $12 pizzas but next week the only pub in the New South Wales town of Henty, population 900, will close. The much-loved local has been on the market a while – offers over $300,000 – but the owner’s had enough. The local butcher, Trav, who’s sitting at the bar, says he’d buy it himself if he had the money.

“Henty is dying!” says third-generation grazier Doug Meyer, the 71-year-old deputy mayor of the Greater Hume Shire, who desperately hopes to save his home town. The bowlo still looks busy, but given the age of the members its days are probably numbered too. Where there were seven bank branches before, now there’s just one, a Bendigo franchise owned by the community. Despite a fitful “shop local” campaign, Henty’s main street feels empty: everyone who needs anything heads off to Wagga Wagga, or Albury-Wodonga, both 45 minutes away by car.

Yet this is the heart of the Riverina, source of 70% of Australia’s food, at the beginning of what should be a decades-long soft-commodities boom. City folk might have never heard of the place, but farmers have; every year, 60,000 of them converge for one of the key fixtures on the agribusiness calendar, Henty Machinery Field Days.

Right now the rural economy is buoyant: prices for beef and lamb are high; crops are in increasing demand overseas, and there is plenty of water around (in some places, too much). The grass has never been greener.

Roughly halfway between Sydney and Melbourne, in the most settled corner of the country, Henty should be pumping. It isn’t: farm aggregation and automation mean employment in agriculture is declining, even as production goes up. As is the case in most country towns, the kids from Billabong High soon head off to the big cities for jobs or degrees, sapping population growth. So it’s last drinks at the Doodle.

It’s a familiar tale. What’s different now is that a private company, Consolidated Land and Rail Australia (CLARA), has turned up in Henty with a plan to build a city of between 250,000 and 400,000 people, five minutes out of town, on a site between Munyabla and Pleasant Hills. As if that’s not ambitious enough, CLARA’s plan is that Henty would be the fifth of eightentirely new cities it would develop over three decades, along the route of a new high-speed rail link between Sydney and Melbourne.

It’s the $200 billion dream of an entrepreneur from the NSW Southern Highlands, Nick Cleary, a one-time dairy farmer, financial adviser and auctioneer, who has assembled a consortium of corporate giants such as Hitachi and GE, a high-powered advisory board including former federal trade minister Andrew Robb and former state premiers Steve Bracks and Barry O’Farrell, and has crack teams at RMIT and CSIRO working up concept designs for his new compact, zero-carbon, water-recycling, fibre-connected “smart cities”.

Never mind that Australia has no inland city of a quarter of a million people apart from Canberra. Or that Australia has been talking about a very fast train for more than 30 years. Cleary is powering ahead.

Unusually, the CLARA plan makes no call on government finances: it is 100% funded from what’s called “value capture”, tapping into the known increase in property value that occurs when land is rezoned and infrastructure such as fast rail goes in. Cleary has been running up and down the Hume Highway, doing secret option deals with farmers, agreeing to buy their paddocks for multiples of what they’re worth now, providing he can get his plan up in the next four years. Cleary says he has about half of the land he needs sewn up, having struck deals with 73 farmers so far, but the clock is ticking. Often value capture involves government taxes and charges levied on developers, with revenue hypothecated back to fund infrastructure spending, but CLARA’s plan is even simpler. If federal, state and local governments back the plan, Cleary and his co-investors will make so much money out of the hundred-fold uplift in property values that spending $50 billion on a high-speed railway will be the least of their worries.

It’s an extreme, privatised version of “build it and they will come”, and is what happens when governments give up on the kind of nation-building that created our bush capital or the Snowy Mountains Hydro-electric Scheme. Instead of a railway built on sound engineering and rational economics, we get a route based on a series of joined-up land deals struck cheaply by an opportunist with “vision”. It leads to some almost random outcomes. Henty, the furthest stop from Sydney or Melbourne, is the most unlikely site of CLARA’s eight new cities, and Cleary admits it would be the last to be developed, perhaps in 2035. Henty was only chosen because it is equidistant from Wagga and Albury, which have been considered certain stops under most fast-rail proposals on the Sydney–Melbourne corridor, but are bypassed under CLARA’s plan, and only serviced by secondary spur lines. Wagga and Albury representatives are miffed, wondering why one wouldn’t capitalise on the investment in their existing cities instead of plonking a station in the middle of nowhere. “It’s a Utopiamoment,” quips Albury’s mayor, Kevin Mack, in a cutting reference to the ABC comedy series.

But former National Party leader and deputy prime minister Tim Fischer, a train aficionado who was a member of the High Speed Rail Advisory Group set up in 2013 by the then Labor government, tells me that CLARA’s new station at Henty is far from crazy and “never has been”. Almost 20 years ago, as a member of the Howard government, Fischer was championing a Sydney–Canberra high-speed rail line and, as opening speaker at one of Henty’s field days, kidded that in the future a nearby station would allow farmers to arrive by very fast train. “From that point on,” says Doug Meyer, “anybody that lived near the Henty field day site got nervous.” Fischer blames a “lack of boldness” for Australia’s failure to build high-speed rail by now.

Meyer knows a fast train to Henty won’t happen in his lifetime. Indeed talking about it, he can barely keep a straight face. “Face facts, I’m not going to be here when this station has its grand opening.” As someone who fought hard to get a resolution up at a local government conference last year to divert one of the northern rivers into the Darling, Meyer laments Australia’s loss of get-up-and-go. “It won’t go anywhere because the people of Australia these days don’t think further ahead than what they can see. If the same attitude existed in the times of the Snowy Mountains scheme it never would’ve been built. We’ve changed from being nation-builders to being people more concerned with things that could go wrong.”

Per capita, Australia is the third-richest nation on earth by economic output, according to International Monetary Fund figures from last year. We have $2 trillion in superannuation funds, the fourth-biggest pool of assets in the world. Even so, we have chronically under-invested in energy, water, transport and communications infrastructure. Our electricity grid is among the dirtiest in the world, we refuse to recycle water, our internet is patchy-to-abysmal and urban congestion costs billions every year.

The route between Sydney and Melbourne, which is the fourth- or fifth-busiest air corridor in the world, has been identified as the single most lucrative high-speed rail opportunity globally. Foreign companies are lining up to build it. Central Japan Railway Company, who pioneered high-speed rail in 1964, has had an office in Sydney since 1988 waiting patiently for Australia to catch up. Yet today fast-rail networks are spreading out on every continent bar two: ours, and Antarctica.

High-speed rail has long been talked about as an alternative to aviation, which is still heavily dependent on fossil fuels. This is missing the point, says Cleary. It’s the regional development along the way that matters most. Fast rail connecting our two biggest capitals would rebalance Australian settlement towards the inland, away from the coast where the majority live. Says Cleary: “Rather than two cities with millions of people sitting on the edge of the coast looking out to sea, with this vast landmass behind us, it’s time that we started looking at [this] opportunity and opening it up.”

The alternative is the unchecked sprawl of Sydney and Melbourne, where property prices are already astronomical, and where commuters spend up to three hours a day in cars just getting to work and back. Cleary calls them vampire cities: people leave home so early and get home so late that they only ever see one another in the dark. Meanwhile, prime farmland on the edge of the metropolis disappears under residential subdivision. On current projections, the two capitals will swallow up between 8 and 11 million of the 14 million new Australians expected by 2050. “I think if you said that to most people in Sydney and Melbourne they’d nearly die,” says Cleary. “Because everyone knows that the system is already congested and it’s overflowing.”

Former tennis champion John Alexander is the Liberal backbencher who has chaired the yearlong Standing Committee on Infrastructure, Transport and Cities, looking at the role of transport connectivity. After all the feasibility studies over the years, he sees a “perfect storm of opportunity” to finally make high-speed rail happen, funded entirely by value capture. When Prime Minister Malcolm Turnbull was presented with the CLARA plan in March, he said it was “all my dreams come true”, although he later added that things that looked too good to be true often were.

High-speed rail: it has to happen; it will never happen. Two sides of a coin, spinning around forever. Can Australia even do nation-building anymore?

In the great Australian land-grab, we have had our share of visionaries who dreamed of building new cities – from Boydtown to the Multi-Function Polis – only to come a cropper. The overly ambitious property developer is part of our psyche: at best we get NSW governor Lachlan Macquarie or Lend Lease founder Dick Dusseldorp; at worst we get Eddie Obeid or the syphilitic Tasmanian commandant in Richard Flanagan’s Gould’s Book of Fish, who winds up circling on his national railway, 200 yards long, admiring the backdrops painted especially for him.

We have also had stop-start, government-led attempts at regional development. Back in 1973, for example, Prime Minister Gough Whitlam invested almost $100 million to make Albury-Wodonga home to 300,000 people by the turn of the century. Malcolm Fraser cut the decentralisation plan three years later, and the twin cities now have a population of around 90,000.

For sheer audacity, the CLARA plan to build eight new cities trumps them all, and Nick Cleary is a most unlikely proponent. Now 40, Cleary grew up on a dairy farm in Bowral, some 100 kilometres south-west of Sydney. After leaving school he did a farm apprenticeship, but instead of working for his dad Cleary struck out on his own, managing the properties of Sydney-based absentee farmers, subcontracting the work out, and making a margin. Meanwhile, he studied business and finance, and worked as a financial planner. After getting married and starting a family, Cleary bought his own dairy in 2004, with 500 cows, but ran into debt within a couple of years as fuel and feed prices doubled, and milk prices halved. With interest rates on business loans skyrocketing, four young kids and another on the way, the Clearys were completely wiped out in the financial crisis. They lost the dairy, their home, everything except a second-hand Ford they bought for $2500. The family company is named after the car’s number plate, WHA-240, now framed at home. Then in his early 30s, Cleary had to work four jobs to get back on his feet, and for a while he woke at 2 am each morning to deliver newspapers. Eventually he went into business coaching and then real estate. His Twitter account, sprinkled with inspirational quotes from Gandhi and Confucius to Lincoln and Mandela, turned into a picture-stream: Cleary on his feet, auctioning off homes all over Sydney, rolled-up contract held tightly in hand. Sold! Sold! Sold!

Five years ago, Cleary had a really big idea: he chose what he thought would be a perfect site for Sydney’s second airport, near Sutton Forest, south of Bowral, and took an option over it. An option to buy land is a handy tool for developers with a grandiose scheme and no means to pay for it yet. It is simply a contract to pay a set price for a property at a specified time in the future, on satisfaction of certain conditions. Cleary imagined an inland, intermodal port on his site, connected by fast rail back to Sydney’s Central Station, and via a freight line to Wollongong’s Port Kembla, generating plenty of jobs, and eventually a whole new city. He was convinced it made much more sense than building the airport at Badgerys Creek on the fringe of Sydney’s heavily populated south-western suburbs. But Cleary, a long-time member of the National Party, had misread the political debate. After 50 years of delay, the Badgerys option was firming, and the vision faltered.

Not to be discouraged, Cleary saw new potential for the Sutton Forest site, which would later become the first stop under CLARA’s even bolder high-speed rail plan. In the lead-up to the 2010 election, in a deal to win Green preferences, the then transport minister, Labor’s Anthony Albanese, had promised a $20 million feasibility study into high-speed rail on the east coast. Three years later a comprehensive ‘High Speed Rail Study: Phase 2 Report’ led by consultants AECOM came up with an optimal route: one costing $50 billion, from Sydney to Melbourne, with a spur line off to Canberra; and another, from Sydney to Newcastle to Brisbane, with a spur line off to the Gold Coast, costing $64 billion. The 534-page report remains the most authoritative look at high-speed rail in Australia, although there is still plenty of debate about its assumptions and conclusions. The most pressing need, the report found, was to protect the corridor. Each time high-speed rail has been studied over the years – in the 1980s it was the Very Fast Train, in the 1990s there was the Speedrail consortium – the projected cost of construction has gone up as more of the corridor is built over, meaning more expensive tunnelling under the cities. When Labor set up its heavyweight High Speed Rail Advisory Group, it put aside $50 million to establish a planning authority, including the states, to reserve the corridor. After the 2013 election, Tony Abbott, who wanted to be known as the “infrastructure prime minister” but preferred to fund private tollways, abolished the advisory group, and counted the $50 million as a budget saving. High-speed rail was dead in the water, again.

Not for Nick Cleary, who only saw opportunity. The impetus came from a chance meeting with John Alexander in Wahroonga, northern Sydney, in 2015, where Cleary was the auctioneer at a Rotary Club charity dinner. While in Opposition, Abbott had put Alexander in charge of a taskforce on sustainable cities policy, and another on a 2020 vision. Chatting over dinner that night, Cleary told Alexander of his dream to link Sydney and Canberra by high-speed rail, via the Southern Highlands and Goulburn, all privately funded. “Why stop there?” Alexander asked. It was a light-bulb moment. Fired up, Cleary spent the next six weeks poring over the Sydney–Melbourne high-speed rail corridor identified in the Phase 2 Report. Then, rather than wait for federal and state governments to declare the corridor officially, Cleary decided to roll the dice and put his foot on key sites along the way.

However, Cleary soon had to depart dramatically from the corridor identified by the experts, which proposed seven stations between Sydney’s Central Station and Melbourne’s Southern Cross: at Holsworthy in Sydney’s south; Mittagong; Civic in Canberra; Wagga Wagga; Albury-Wodonga; Shepparton; and the northern Melbourne suburb of Campbellfield. Cleary couldn’t option cheap land in those places, where tracts were already cut up into small lots. He needed to negotiate with a minimum number of parties, over big parcels of land – between 5000 and 10,000 acres for each of his new cities. Cleary says he never told the owners why he wanted to buy their land: “We didn’t want it to get out into the media because we see one of our major assets is to have the land under our legal control. What we did tell our landowners was that it was a significant infrastructure project that was going to mean jobs to their region. We couldn’t tell them any more about that at that point in time.”

Since going public, Cleary says the response from landowners has been overwhelmingly positive. “Certainly none of them have asked for a better price.”

Cleary needs his landowners onside, and has to pay them an annual fee to keep his option alive. The result of Cleary’s acquisition spree, which has so far cost CLARA just under $3 million, is eight of the greenest-of-greenfield sites you could imagine: Sutton Forest; Marulan, east of Goulburn; Jerrawa, east of Yass; the junction of the Hume and Snowy Mountains highways, south of Gundagai; Munyabla, west of Henty; Tocumwal, on the Murray River; Tallygaroopna, north of Shepparton; and Nagambie Lakes. Each site is a 5- to 15-minute drive from anywhere, but Cleary sees this as a selling point. He’s not wrong: under CLARA’s plan, apart from becoming outposts of a nearby larger city, the heritage and character of existing towns along the corridor will be preserved. Just as the locals like it.

Semi-retired real estate agent Peter Curlewis, who has agreed to sell CLARA his 311-acre farm at Jerrawa, told me how the negotiation went down. Curlewis is 76, and says his wife prefers their flat in Canberra nowadays, so she can go to the galleries and shows. Curlewis’ son is too busy managing the family’s real-estate agency to keep up the running of the farm. One day, Curlewis received a letter from CLARA and, curious, he made an appointment to meet Cleary. Land near Yass sells for $1500–$2000 an acre, but Cleary was offering to pay him two or three times that. (The figures are confidential.) Curlewis agreed, and also offered to help sign up local farmers through the family agency. “Initially there was a fair bit of surprise and scepticism,” he says. “I think there’s now a realisation that it’s probably going to happen.”

Farmers are not necessarily telling their neighbours about their decision to sell to CLARA. At the site south of Gundagai, I walked up the driveway of one property to ask about the plan. A city of a quarter-million people might be built a few hundred metres away, I said to the owners. They had never heard of it – not CLARA, not the fast rail, not the new city, not a thing. Yet their own hillside features in the promo video on CLARA’s website.

CLARA relies on the more obscure sites like Henty or Tocumwal. They have to build all eight cities, Cleary tells me, to fund the whole line. “The eight cities [plan] works because it’s only got 400,000 people [per city]. Some people say, ‘Why have eight cities? Why not just have four cities?’ If we had four cities of 800,000 people the pressure would be so great it’d be inefficient. Or they’d be so wide that we’d get urban sprawl and defeat the whole purpose of what we’re trying to achieve. There are certain metrics that will make this work. If we were to cut out certain cities we can’t pay for the whole thing. That’s the reality of it.”

CLARA’s plan is technology-agnostic: the choice of engineering partner will determine whether the line will be steel on wheel, magnetic-levitation technology, or involve something else entirely. The assumption is that on average the trains will travel at 450 kilometres an hour or more, meaning Sydney to Melbourne will take less than two hours. CLARA envisages a roll out in three phases: first, Melbourne to Shepparton, which will be documented and submitted to the Victorian government early next year as an unsolicited or market-led proposal; second, Sydney to Goulburn; third, Yass to Canberra. Or something like that. Cleary admits it’s a moveable feast.

Roughly, CLARA’s numbers go like this: farm land bought for an average of $1000 per housing lot is transformed into eight cities with roughly 165,000 lots in each, sold at the equivalent of $150,000 per lot (8 x 165,000 x $150,000 ≈ $200 billion). Of the $149,000 uplift per dwelling allotment, $80,000 is for civil infrastructure, $35,000 will fund the rail, and $34,000 is CLARA’s profit margin. The plan is to sell down CLARA in stages (mainly as non-voting shares to retain control), culminating in a $4 billion-plus float after the scheme has all necessary approvals and construction is set to begin, scheduled for 2021. Based on the market capitalisation of other listed developers, the float should value CLARA at more than $30 billion. With a stake of roughly 30%, Cleary alone would be worth a cool $9 billion. He plays that down. “There would be plenty of money to go around but I haven’t even thought about that,” he says. “It’s certainly not the driving factor. If you did this because you were going to get a big payday you’d be mad … My aim here is to make a difference, to provide a solution, and to implement that solution. And if we do all right out of it? Great.”

What he doesn’t want is a federal government call for expressions of interest or a tender that would consider all comers on an equal basis. Rivals are emerging, from Chinese and Korean consortia to the American “Hyperloop”, brainchild of Tesla’s Elon Musk, which would send cars of 24 people down vacuum tubes at near-supersonic speeds. Quicker than a plane, Hyperloop technology is straight out of science fiction. Sydney to Melbourne would take less than an hour; Sydney to Newcastle, ten minutes; Melbourne to Shepparton, five. In late October, Hyperloop One executive Alan James told John Alexander’s Standing Committee on Infrastructure, Transport and Cities, “if you connect A and B with a railway, you get A plus B. If you connect A and B with a Hyperloop, you get ‘AB-ville’; effectively, a single economy where it does not really matter where you live or work.”

With such powerful competitors breathing down his neck, Cleary wants CLARA’s plan picked up right now, as he told the same standing committee. If the fast-rail planning process is opened up to all comers, “the risk is that we do not get started. [That] is a risk that we do not want to take. There are opportunities there … We are not looking for money. We are not looking for any legislative changes. We are looking for the existing planning framework to be placed on top of our sites … [We have] a unique idea and a tremendous vision that can be implemented with the land we have, and with the opportunity that exists.”

He urged the government to “show leadership” and warned that a tender process would take years.

With CLARA having its foot on the land, Cleary imagines it is in the box seat. But that is true only if governments agree to his corridor. Some days after Cleary’s appearance, Alexander told me that his job was to look at the national interest, not CLARA’s interest, and the committee was quite likely to recommend a call for expressions of interest.

Cleary doesn’t mind being called a dreamer, or even crazy. People said the same thing about his hero, Maha Sinnathamby, the Malaysian immigrant of Tamil descent who has spent the past 25 years building a new city, Springfield, on the outskirts of Brisbane. Cleary says Sinnathamby, worth more than $900 million according to the BRW Rich List and certain to be crowned a billionaire, was an “absolute inspiration of mine” since the very beginning. He devoured Sinnathamby’s biography, Stop Not Till the Goal Is Reached, published in 2012, and went to Springfield, which he describes as a “magnificent achievement”. Cleary once tried to get a meeting with Sinnathamby, but admits, “I was a bit too much of a dreamer at the time, and maybe I just couldn’t get through the PA.”

Sinnathamby’s success, while overcoming deep-seated racial prejudice, is one of those rare demonstrations that Australia can be a land of opportunity. It is easy to see why Cleary would find in him a kindred spirit. Like Cleary, Sinnathamby went broke, but turned things around. Like Cleary, Sinnathamby spruiks optimism and an all-conquering determination, and believes the key is to lobby relentlessly for infrastructure. Springfield is the model for CLARA, the closest thing to the kind of “smart city” Cleary would like to build: “[He] got the government to spend $400 million to put a rail link out to his site. That made all the difference. [That] meant that he could get a site that was probably very low density – even rural-residential almost – and convert that to much higher density and a viable, almost inland, city … [CLARA] is just a bigger version really of what Maha has achieved. It’s in action now. They’ve got 30,000 people there; it’s just amazing.”

When I visit Springfield (not named after the Simpsons’ home town), the middle of it is still a vast construction site where monolithic office and apartment towers are springing out of the ground, and earthworks are underway for new health and education precincts. Aside from the Springfield Land Corporation’s own headquarters, there is a data centre and a building for GE, and lots of cars. To me the place feels more like a sprawling business park than a city. But between the two train stations and the big shopping centre, the hospital and a University of Southern Queensland campus, there are people everywhere and it looks busy. Some of the housing looks established, nestling up to man-made lakes or the Greg Norman–designed golf course, and resale prices are said to be healthy. There is no urban fabric, to the eye at least, but Sinnathamby is honest enough to admit a city’s culture takes a long time to develop, and the process can’t be forced. “You can’t pump it,” he says. “It’s not natural.” Importantly, Sinnathamby says, there are jobs at Springfield, where the unemployment rate is 3%. Sinnathamby was determined not to build a dormitory city, full of commuters to Brisbane. By focusing on education, health and technology, Springfield has emerged as a rival to Ipswich, which is increasingly jealous of its neighbour’s success.

Sinnathamby is sympathetic to Cleary’s plan. “I admire his courage and enthusiasm … I think as far as a [high-speed] rail line goes between Sydney and Melbourne, it is very important to have that, we all recognise it and somebody has to do it.” But Sinnathamby laughs, with a convincing mania, when he says that he and his team have worked 24 x 7 for 25 years to make Springfield, population 34,000, what it is today. Sinnathamby says building eight cities from scratch along the Sydney–Melbourne corridor, each ten times bigger than Springfield, would take “a superhuman effort”. Unlike in India or China, he says, people can’t be moved around at will.

Obviously, Cleary hopes to become as rich as Sinnathamby is, except his timelines are much shorter: he wants to do it in five years.

Sometimes it seems CLARA’s wheels are already coming off. Its first managing director, financier Jay Grant, quit in July, and Cleary won’t say why. Grant’s firm, Newhaven Wealth, has since sold out of its shareholding in CLARA – whether at a profit or loss is unclear. Announcement of a replacement managing director was apparently imminent at time of writing. Meanwhile, Steve Bracks and Barry O’Farrell have both resigned from the advisory board. They were only ever going to be involved at the launch, Cleary says, and remain supporters of the project. Neither returned calls from the Monthly. Andrew Robb, who remains on the advisory board, which meets by phone, was overseas and also unavailable for comment. Cleary is raising $35 million to fund the first stage of the project, and that process, originally expected by the end of 2016, will not be finalised until March–April. When I asked the prime minister’s office and those of the NSW and Victorian premiers about CLARA’s plan, there was no comment. ACT chief minister Andrew Barr has already said he is “very wary” of CLARA’s plan. Decentralisation, after all, is not really in Canberra’s interest.

At this stage it’s not even worth picking holes in the CLARA plan. It’s almost all hole. Without the most basic details – like where, or when – local mayors whose shires might host one of CLARA’s new cities are scratching their heads. Their in-principle reactions range from doubtful to enthusiastic, but the conversation occurs in the same way one might talk about living on Mars. The new mayor of Wingecarribee Shire, Ken Halstead, ponders whether residents of the toney Southern Highlands want a quarter of a million refugees from Sydney shoehorned into their district. On his own stomping ground, Cleary admits, “We’ve had a mixed review here, to be honest with you.” The new mayor of Goulburn Mulwaree, Bob Kirk, points out how many years it took, and how much money was spent, to put in just one new water pipeline to supply an expected 30,000 residents by 2030, in a city whose dams got below 3% during the millennium drought. Kirk’s predecessor, Geoff Kettle, who pulled together a coalition of 18 councils supporting high-speed rail when Labor was in government, is very supportive of CLARA, but questions whether it has the right end of the stick, and should be doing Sydney–Canberra before Melbourne–Shepparton. Shepparton mayor Dinny Adem, who spoke at CLARA’s launch six months ago, is a big fan, although he says a decent heavy rail service to Melbourne – like Bendigo’s – is a much higher priority. Agribusiness after all is a highly globalised industry, on the cusp of a boom, and recent free-trade agreements open up massive opportunities for the area. Adem has struck a deal to export nectarines directly to China; apples and pears, apricots and plums are next. Having said that, Shepparton almost lost its famous SPC cannery a few years ago and was looking shaky even in November.

For all the meetings and presentations, CLARA has made no formal submissions to any of the councils, and none have lines on maps, or have incorporated any potential high-speed rail corridor into local planning. Many councils have just had elections. High-speed rail wasn’t even a lower-order issue in any of them. However, not one of the councillors I spoke to dismissed the CLARA plan. Anything to give country towns a boost, an economic imperative, and stop the kids leaving. Even those who haven’t met Cleary endorse his ambition.

While researching this story I contacted the Australasian Railways Association, whose spokesperson, Emma Woods, at one point said that the obvious first steps for high-speed rail in this country were to protect the corridor and choose a technology, so that smaller, more affordable networks that grew organically from the major capitals – whether from Melbourne to Shepparton, Sydney to Newcastle, or Brisbane to the Gold Coast – could eventually be joined up with confidence. “All it takes is for federal, state and local governments to work together,” she said. At which point I had to laugh.

Even if our creaking federation can be made to work, nothing will kill off a long-range project more effectively than politics as usual. In 2013, former Goulburn mayor Geoff Kettle was at Parliament House for an industry get-together on high-speed rail, on the very night Kevin Rudd deposed Julia Gillard. The suits fell to their phones as texts and emails announced another prime ministerial knifing. The conference unravelled.

Our most recent experience in nation-building, the National Broadband Network, is not going well. Can we do better next time? For Angus Taylor, Liberal MP for the Southern Highlands seat of Hume and the federal assistant minister for cities, nation-building is somewhat personal. Taylor’s grandfather, the engineer William Hudson, was manager of the Snowy Mountains scheme for almost 20 years. Taylor knows its history intimately, and has no doubt Australia can still do nation-building, but he adds: “The Snowy wasn’t created from a grand master plan on day one, let me tell you, it evolved over time. It had to get some early successes – Guthega Dam was in fact its earliest success – to then move on from there. The idea that you can come up with a nation-building project on the back of a serviette, and then demand that it be done, is just crazy.”

Cheap shot or otherwise, Taylor has a similar critique of the former Labor government’s approach to high-speed rail: “When Albo did his $20 million business planning for the Brisbane–Sydney–Melbourne high-speed rail link, regional development or urban development or city building got a paragraph. It got a paragraph! In a $20 million project! … When there was an opportunity to think really hard about building great cities, it was just absolutely missed.”

Albanese hits right back at Taylor, who he says is all talk: “When he’s built something, anywhere, he can be critical.” While the PM likes to tweet pictures of himself on public transport or opening new railway lines, Albanese fumes that they were commissioned by Labor. “This is a government who haven’t laid a metre of new rail track, anywhere, but have been quite happy to attend openings of projects like Regional Rail Link [in Melbourne] and Moreton Bay rail line [in Brisbane] … and pretend that they had anything to do with it. They’re now in their second term, they still haven’t commenced a single passenger rail project anywhere in Australia.”

So the debate threatens to sink back into a tennis match. But with high-speed rail there is a glimmer of hope. Albanese is persisting with his private member’s bill to establish a high-speed rail authority, with representatives from state and local government, at least to protect the corridor once and for all. Thankfully it is not an especially high-profile bit of legislation – greater media attention does not seem to help with these things – and the politics are not especially hard. With a smidgin of goodwill, perhaps, one day soon, something like Albanese’s bill might pass parliament. Industry minister Greg Hunt returned from a November trip to China and Korea and declared “now is the moment” for high-speed rail in Australia, and the cabinet would be taking it forward.

John Alexander’s standing committee is preparing its final report, which at the time of writing is scheduled to be released before the end of 2016. Alexander is hopeful that the report will not gather dust, like so many others, and says the prime minister chose a standing committee of the lower house precisely because he was hoping for some bipartisanship. “We have to elevate ourselves above political debate,” says Alexander. His own back-of-the-envelope numbers are both more and less aggressive than CLARA’s: capturing $100,000 in value from the sale of 50,000 lots per year for a decade would be enough to fund a $50 billion railway, he says.

Albanese says value capture has become a sort of panacea for many in the Turnbull government, who think it means infrastructure can be built for free. What’s more, while he’s convinced of the merits of high-speed rail in Australia, he doesn’t believe that the development of eight entirely new cities along the Sydney–Melbourne line is feasible. “I don’t think a [high-speed rail] system in itself will create eight new cities. It will assist development of cities where they are now, including places like Albury-Wodonga and Canberra, dare I say it [but] the idea that eight cities will come from scratch is, I think, very ambitious.”

The closure of another country pub is not nothing. It is hard enough driving past them, boarded up, often right across the street from each other, grand old pubs with vast balconies that still sing of long hot raucous afternoons – not the odd drinker but hordes of them. “Since all those pubs have gone, there’s no meeting place,” says Gundagai administrator Christine Ferguson, a farmer and former federal president of the National Party, whose own theory is that pub closures in those tiny towns is a factor in the rising suicide rate in rural and regional Australia. “The blokes just sit at home and drink, and they get depressed … they just sit at home and worry.”

The continuing depopulation of inland Australia raises the question: have the settlers actually failed to make an attachment to this land? Australians crowd around the edges of the continent, hemmed in between a hotter, drier, angrier landmass and the rising seas, leaving FIFO workers and robots run by multinationals to mine and farm the interior.

It’s an admittedly bleak scenario.

Nick Cleary is much more upbeat. “The way to motivate yourself,” he says, “is to have something to aim for and to actually prove to your kids that things can be achieved and this nation is a great nation and it is a lucky country and there’s so much opportunity here.

“To me, there were some dark times. [But then] when we had a site selected for the airport, we went about optioning it and that dream in itself was an opportunity [and] would re-energise me … Now we’re looking at an opportunity over 35 years to make a difference to 2.8 million to 3 million people’s lives … What spurs me on is that you can have that sort of impact. And you can, but you’ve got to be bold enough to do it.”


Paddy Manning is a contributing editor (politics) at The Monthly. He is a writer and journalist who has worked for the ABC, Fairfax, Crikey and The Australian. He is also the author of three books, including Boganaire: The rise and fall of Nathan Tinkler.







A 2016 image from Consolidated Land and Rail Australia (CLARA), the company planning a fast rail link between Melbourne and Sydney. It will be given millions of dollars in public money by the Turnbull government to write the business case for its first stage, to Shepparton.

A 2016 image from Consolidated Land and Rail Australia (CLARA), the company planning a fast rail link between Melbourne and Sydney. It will be given millions of dollars in public money by the Turnbull government to write the business case for its first stage, to Shepparton. CREDIT:CLARA




Consolidated Land and Rail Australia (CLARA) a private company in July 2016 launched a $200 billion plan to build a high-speed rail link between Melbourne and Sydney with eight stops and plans for new regional cities along the route.

-deals to secure almost half the private land needed for the project had already been struck

-the company is backed with funds from Australia and the United States

-and “Value Capture” ….

CLARA’s board includes representatives from the public and private sectors in the United States, as well as former Australian premiers Steve Bracks and Barry O’Farrell and former trade minister Andrew Robb.

Read more:


DESPITE this the Turnbull Govt advances with the Western Sydney Airport proposal not satisfied with overdeveloping Sydney and Melbourne but to destroy our regions too!


Canberra opens public purse for private fast-rail project’s plan


By Clay Lucas


9 March 2018

 A consortium that said it would privately fund a fast rail line from Melbourne to Sydney will get a share of $20 million in public funding from the Turnbull government.

Consolidated Land and Rail Australia, or CLARA, is a private company that claims it can build two inland cities in Victoria and a further six in New South Wales that are linked by high-speed rail lines between Melbourne, Sydney and Canberra.


Their rail line would, CLARA’s plans say, be paid for by the company taking options to buy land in regional areas at a low price. The land would then be sold at a far higher price once a rail line was built nearby.


The “uplift” in land value would provide billions of dollars in profit, CLARA’s directors say.

The rail line’s first stage would travel from Melbourne to Shepparton – a trip that CLARA claimed could be done in 30 minutes. The company has never revealed where its central Melbourne station would be built.

The company has told the Turnbull government it can cut travel times from “approximately three hours”, though V/Line timetables show the fastest weekday service now is two and half hours.




One of CLARA’s directors Nick Cleary is a former real estate agent from NSW’s Southern Highlands. When the project was launched in 2016, he said in a media release that “unlike other proposals for high-speed rail in the past, CLARA’s infrastructure can be paid for from the city development rather than from government coffers”.

Government coffers will be opened to CLARA though, along with two other groups in New South Wales and Queensland, to help them write a business case.


The federal government is considering three proposals to develop a high-speed train link between Melbourne and Sydney.

The federal government is considering three proposals to develop a high-speed train link between Melbourne and Sydney.CREDIT:GREG NEWINGTON


The federal government is considering three proposals to develop a high-speed train link between Melbourne and Sydney.CREDIT:GREG NEWINGTON

The funding has been granted under the Turnbull Government’s “$20 million Faster Rail Prospectus”, two federal ministers said in a joint press release issued on Friday.

“In the Faster Rail Prospectus, the Turnbull Government stated that we wanted to look at both ‘evolutionary’ and ‘revolutionary’ proposals,” said Paul Fletcher, Cities Minister, and Michael McCormack, Infrastructure Minister and Deputy Prime Minister, in their statement.

“The three proposals chosen for further development are at different points along this spectrum. One involves upgrades to existing track, another proposes entirely new track, and the third sees a mix. We have also ensured that three different transport corridors, in three different states, are being considered,” they said.




In most liveable stakes, Melbourne’s biggest rivals may be up the road

Add to shortlist


Canberra granted CLARA funding for the new rail line’s business case without consulting the Victorian government.

Public Transport Minister Jacinta Allan’s office was asked if the state government supported the project. “We’re focused on real projects, so the answer is no,” a spokeswoman replied.

The spokeswoman said the government was providing more regional train services to Shepparton, would soon begin upgrading the rail line from Shepparton, and was also ready to start  a “$1.57 billion Regional Rail Revival”.

“We are still waiting for the federal government to release the funds that will allow us to upgrade every regional passenger line in the state,” she said.

The fact sheet for the project released by the federal government said the CLARA proposal provided “an innovative and revolutionary model for building a high-speed rail link between Melbourne and Greater Shepparton that does not involve direct costs to government or taxpayers”.

Mr Fletcher’s office has been asked how much public money CLARA will be given as part of the $20 million round of funding and where the rail line will begin from in Melbourne. His spokeswoman said she would respond on Friday afternoon.



Clay Lucas

Clay Lucas is city editor for The Age. Clay has worked at The Age since 2005, covering state politics, urban affairs, transport, local government and workplace relations for The Age and Sunday Age.





‘I am not going to wait’: Berejiklian denies high-speed rail is an election stunt

BUT it clearly is … that is the conclusion drawn on all news reports last night.

MEANWHILE Federal MP John Alexander has been beavering away with a Consortium, CLARA

Bennelong MP John Alexander Magic Bullet … 15 MILLION Mega City from Newcastle to Nowra

 JA’s solution, his magic bullet is to create a “Megacity” stretching from Newcastle to Nowra …  connected by HSR … 

Apart from his engagements with Huang and others it is now revealed he has been beavering away on a concept of a megacity of 15 million people

CLARA (HSR) was to connect major cities to airports.  Looks like it is now to serve a high-rise megacity …

The “LNP will not let go of their market of  Ultra High Wealth Visa Holders seeking permanent residency” … together with Planning Sinister Roberts a national plan to feck us up for 50 years and beyond!–zvYAVotptdBhmKVlQTe73LLhY0-OwsSv8



“GREENFIELDS AND BLUE SKY Is Nick Cleary’s ambitious CLARA project the answer to Australia’s fast rail question?”




‘I am not going to wait’: Berejiklian denies high-speed rail is an election stunt

Premier Gladys Berejiklian has rebutted suggestions her promise to spend $4.6 million planning fast rail in NSW is an election stunt, saying her government could not afford to wait for the federal government before starting work on the scheme.

Ms Berejiklian said on Tuesday she would start “work” on a fast rail network in the next term of government after appointing a British rail expert to consider four potential high-speed routes between Sydney and regional centres.

But after years and thousands of pages of reports and studies into the viability of high-speed rail on Australia’s east coast, Ms Berejiklian rejected suggestions the pre-election announcement was aimed at marginal seats in the state’s regional areas.

Premier commits to faster rail for NSW

Play Video


Premier commits to faster rail for NSW

Work will start on a fast rail line from Sydney to a NSW regional centre in the next term of government under a promise made by Gladys Berejiklian.


“Far from it. This is a government getting on with what it does well,” she said.


The four routes the government will ask British rail expert Andrew McNaughton to consider for faster or high-speed rail are from  Sydney north to the Central Coast and Newcastle; west to Lithgow, Bathurst and Parkes; south to Wollongong and Nowra; and south west to Goulburn and Canberra.


In a further sign her government will seek to distance itself from its federal counterparts during the state election campaign, Ms Berejiklian said she could not wait for the federal government or other states to start work on high-speed rail.

Premier Gladys Berejiklian and Transport Minister Andrew Constannce vow to start work on a fast rail network.
Premier Gladys Berejiklian and Transport Minister Andrew Constannce vow to start work on a fast rail network.CREDIT:AAP


“We need to start the work now if we want to see fast rail in NSW. I am not going to wait for the other states and the federal government,” she said.

“This is the first time we are looking at this network within NSW.”

But transport experts say the enormous cost of faster rail or high-speed lines makes it unachievable without a national approach. A new line for high-speed trains from Sydney to Newcastle is estimated at upwards of $40 billion given much of it would have to in tunnels.

VIEW:  How fast could the proposed fast rail be? 


While the announcement was scant on detail, Ms Berejiklian said it could involve upgrading existing rail corridors, extending them, or build entirely new rail lines.

“I can give you this assurance: we will be starting in the next term of government. It might take us many years to get us to the network we want to build,” she said.

But NSW Labor leader Michael Daley said the state’s Liberals had struggled to build a light rail line between Sydney’s CBD and the south east yet “they want us to believe that they can do a fast rail network in the next term of government”.

“[It is] absolute pie in the sky stuff from a desperate government in panic mode,” he said.

The latest announcement comes five months after NSW Labor promised to commit funding for a study into reducing the four-hour train journey time on the existing rail line between Sydney and Canberra if it is elected to government at the election next March.

The Berejiklian government will direct $4.6 million from funds received from the sale of the Snowy Hydro scheme towards the initial planning for high speed rail.

Professor McNaughton, who has been involved in the United Kingdom’s High Speed 2 rail project costing nearly $100 billion, said NSW’s topography was not “exactly ideal for very high speed” rail, and it was important to remember that fast rail was expensive and “very fast rail is very expensive”.

“It’s not about speed, it’s about time. I am usually asked how fast is fast and the answer is as fast as necessary to … get the choices we want,” he said.

“If you make it the Concorde for the rich you’ve defeated the whole purpose of doing it. If this is not a system that everybody can use I wouldn’t be here.”

He will chair the state panel charged with delivering plans to the government by Christmas next year.



They have been trotting out HSR since the 80’s and have spent lots $’s investigating, time and time again.


This time it’s not Very Fast. Just plain old Fast. Very Fast is too expensive. Hence the “Utopia” take on this!


Did you catch the news items last night about “Capture” (Value Capture) for Inland Cities along the way to pay for it?  That is what John Alexander and his mates have been working on …


Cheap land they said … probably cheap because they will thieve it off farmers and other landholders …


Then up-zone for residential, and which-ever consortium of developers has a hand in it will make mega $’s.


Can you almost envision Transurban move into rail?


Did you see the so and so from the Committee for Sydney also spruiking?

PERHAPS if NSW INC had not wasted so much on compulsory acquisitions, toxic tunnels, stacks and toll roads, dinky Metro, the light fail and … we could have had faster rail – that which was investigated and a Report made back in 2013!




The government unveiled the plans at Sydney’s Central Station this morning. Picture: NSW Government




FASTER RAIL on the agenda for state and federal election … but what lays behind this?

The Berejiklian Government prior to the March 2019 Election is expected to commit to a feasibility study for the best route for faster rail services to connect regional areas to Sydney

The LNP Coalition Government is expected to announce it will consider the feasibility of as many as four routes for HSR

MEANWHILE Bennelong MP John Alexander on 27 November offered a solution, his magic bullet to create a “Megacity” stretching from Newcastle to Nowra …  connected by HSR … 

Apart from his engagements with Huang and others it is now revealed he has been beavering away on a concept of a megacity of 15 million people between Newcastle and Nowra!

CLARA (HSR) was to connect major cities to airports.  Looks like it is now to serve a higher density megacity …

IT appears the “LNP will not let go of their market of  Ultra High Wealth Visa Holders seeking permanent residency” …

THIS also raises the question of “Land Amalgamation” in NSW with the Berejiklian government having introduced legislation for  land amalgamation to enable development of key growth sites … which appears to be the ‘legalised theft of people’s homes’ to enable more development through the Office of Strategic Lands

HSR can be funded and maintained by tourism; Austria with an 8 million population has one of the best Rail Transport Systems in the World!!

AUSTRALIA like NORWAY is an EXPORTING NATION (CHINA needs us) and we should maintain a small population so that our wealth is not diluted by high immigration growth with the expense of infrastructure etc to meet this contrived demand.


Faster rail services on the agenda for state and federal elections



The Berejiklian government is expected to commit to a feasibility study to identify the best route for faster rail services to connect regional areas to Sydney.

With the Liberal-National coalition entering campaign mode ahead of the state poll in March, the government is understood to be set to announce as early as this week that it will consider the feasibility of as many as four routes for high speed, or faster rail services.

Government warned: act now on high-speed rail

Play Video


Government warned: act now on high-speed rail

The most likely routes to be considered include Sydney-Canberra via the new $5 billion-plus airport at Badgerys Creek, and Sydney-Newcastle.

A commitment to a feasibility study will place the prospect of faster rail on Australia’s east coast on the agenda for both the federal and state elections next year.


Three business cases for faster rail on the country’s east coast – one of which will consider the viability of a line between Newcastle and Sydney – are also due to be completed early next year after the federal government set aside funding in March.

High-speed rail is set to return to the agenda during the NSW and federal election campaigns.
High-speed rail is set to return to the agenda during the NSW and federal election campaigns.CREDIT:AFR


Transport sources said the most viable route for a faster train line was Sydney-Goulburn-Canberra.

“But you can’t build it without federal funding,” one said.

The state government is already committed to new transport projects, such as a metro line from Sydney’s CBD to Parramatta and a second motorway tunnel under Sydney Harbour, whose combined cost will run into the tens of billions of dollars over the next decade.

A new line for a fast train from Sydney to Newcastle is likely to be prohibitively expensive because the terrain would require a significant length to run through tunnels.

In July, NSW Labor promised to commit funding for a study into reducing the four-hour train journey time between Sydney and Canberra if it is elected to government at the state election next March.

Premier Gladys Berejiklian said several months ago during a trip to Japan that she would “love to see high-speed rail servicing” the state but noted that it would need to go beyond NSW and would require federal funding for it to become viable.

The Premier’s office declined to comment on Monday.

But NSW Nationals leader John Barilaro, who holds the marginal seat of Monaro, said last month that part of the funds the state received from the sale of the Snowy Hydro scheme will go towards identifying a new rail corridor for a fast train line between Sydney and Canberra.

report by Infrastructure Australia last year said high-speed trains could be running between Canberra and Sydney within 15 years.

However, the country’s peak infrastructure body said governments needed to act quickly to buy land along any proposed rail corridor to avoid potential cost blowouts.

Federal Labor’s transport spokesman, Anthony Albanese, has long been a proponent of high-speed rail on Australia’s east coast. He has been pushing for a high-speed rail authority to be set up to oversee planning, a business case and the options for private sector investment.

A $20 million study commissioned by the Rudd government and completed in 2013 estimated the cost of a high-speed rail line from Melbourne to Brisbane via Sydney at $114 billion.

Matt O’Sullivan is the Transport Reporter for The Sydney Morning Herald.





June 22, 2016

Transit value capture is used in Hong Kong. Flickr/Kin, CC BY


Nicole Gurran
Professor – Urban and Regional Planning, University of Sydney

Stewart Lawler
Lecturer in Property and Built Environment, University of Sydney

Disclosure statement

Nicole Gurran receives funding from the Australian Housing and Urban Research Institute (AHURI).

Stewart Lawler does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.

University of Sydney

University of Sydney provides funding as a member of The Conversation AU.

Value capture secures some of the benefits delivered by public investment to offset the costs of provision.

The notion has been around in various forms for a while, but recently gained steam. Prime Minister’s Malcolm Turnbull’s Smart Cities Plan touts value capture as a way to better distribute “the costs and benefits in publicly funded infrastructure to facilitate a project that may not otherwise occur”.

But there’s a lot of confusion about what value capture actually means and how it might operate in Australia.

What is ‘value capture’?

Public investment in a new rail line or motorway can generate huge increases in surrounding land values. In part the increase derives from improved accessibility for existing residents and businesses. High windfalls also arise once land has been rezoned to capitalise on higher development opportunities generated by the new infrastructure.

Since public investments and decisions are intended to maximise community benefit, it seems unfair and inefficient that some private landowners profit immensely from the process while others gain little or may even be disadvantaged.

Value capture mechanisms seek to rectify this by clawing back at least some of the increased business revenue or land value. These funds are then allocated towards the initial costs of infrastructure provision. In the case of a planning change, land value uplift can also help ensure that affordable housing for low income groups is included in new development.

How does value capture work?

The PM’s Smart Cities Plan doesn’t offer much detail as to how a value capture model would operate in Australia. Several different approaches are used overseas, but their potential transferability is unclear.

Transit value capture is used in Hong Kong and Japan to fund railway lines and new town development. This is a project-based approach which packages investment in railway and housing development together. Commercial holdings along the railway line deliver an ongoing revenue stream as does long term investment in residential development. In Hong Kong, a significant program of public rental and subsidised home ownership has also been delivered as part of this model.

Project-based transit value depends on access to large swathes of low cost land (in Hong Kong the government retains land ownership, so the land component is essentially free). It also depends on ongoing residential and commercial investment along the new route over time, which in turn assumes buoyant economic growth. When the Japanese economy stagnated, the potential for railway operators to self-finance their projects did too.

Tax Increment Financing (TIF) is used widely in the US to finance new transit and urban renewal projects. The model draws on anticipated increases in business revenue or rents in areas where incremental value uplift will occur. A portion of the increase is captured via a special property tax which is then allocated to repay the debt.

Australian local governments can also introduce special purpose levies to fund specific items through property taxes or rates. The Gold Coast light rail project for instance, was partly financed via the council’s annual transport levy (now around $111). However, since the levy applies to all ratepayers, rather than confined to areas where direct value uplift occurred, this doesn’t represent value capture in the strict sense of the term.

Value capture through the planning process is another approach. Unlike development contributions, which in Australia are used to internalise the costs of servicing a particular project (like roads, carparks, or footpaths), so they aren’t borne by existing ratepayers, value capture focuses on the benefits (often called “betterment” or “planning gain”) accruing from public investment or planning decisions.

One way of capturing value created through public investment or planning is to levy the charge on the first property transaction (ie. land sale) following the change. Another is to add an additional levy to existing contributions paid by developers.

The NSW government’s foreshadowed “Special Infrastructure Contribution” for new residential development along the Parramatta Rd light rail corridor ($200 per metre of gross floor area) is a recent example.

While this amounts to around $20,000 an apartment (at most about 3% of current sales prices), industry lobby group the Urban Taskforce claim the levy will discourage development and hurt home buyers. That’s cheeky since house prices are set by the market – which in the case of a light rail corridor will rise by much more than 3%. Ultimately the Taskforce worries that value capture places “an unfair burden on particular sectors of society” by which they presumably mean landowners and developers.

What would need to happen to extend value capture models in Australia?
Besides the politics, a number of issues must be addressed if value capture is to be extended in Australia. First, calculating value uplift is complex. Often land prices rise well in anticipation of investment or a planning change, so robust framework for value capture should be in place well before such speculation might occur.

Second, value capture should not discourage development or make land acquisition more expensive. This means close attention to project viability when setting capture requirements. Third, robust mechanisms for collection through either the planning process, as an ongoing property tax, or when land is sold, are needed.

Finally, although the current conversation focuses on transport, over time there will be pressure to fund other socially beneficial infrastructure. Two obvious candidates are schools, which also improve land values, or affordable housing, which is often lost when land values rise.

However fuzzy current conversations about value capture may be, the Commonwealth’s new interest in cities and the need to support more affordable homes near public transport, is welcome. So too the recognition that public investment and policy changes in urban and regional areas generate enormous value, which can and should be shared more widely.











(It has been pointed out with Value Capture the artist should have depicted high-rise!!)


WHAT we are experiencing in this Nation and especially in NSW is a transfer … a pipeline of our Public Assets to private interests with some $130 Billion worth of public assets sold off in NSW alone!

CAAN has touched on this topic from time to time, and we offer some “food for thought” … it comes back to the “Culture which is established at the very Top” ..

Value Capture is about billing the people who get the benefit of the Infrastructure Project contrary to those in its path with Compulsory Acquisition, and being shortchanged on the market value of their properties.

WILL the “I am not a Totalitarian Government” tax those that get the benefits to give it to the people who lose their homes or businesses?

A prime example of this is WestCONnex during the construction phase of 2 – 5 years the victims have lost $Millions!

Sydney Metro accused of ‘unfair pressure tactics’ in acquiring homes

Property owners undergoing compulsory acquisition told compensation offers expire in 21 days

VALUE CAPTURE … it’s pernicious … it’s saying to everyone in the community “I have got this idea and I am going to make you pay for my idea”!



“The Greens have concerns about information absent from today’s announced CLARA proposal, apparently due to commercial in confidence considerations.

“Being asked to ‘just trust us’ is not good enough for a project of this scale.”


Australian Government releases Value Capture Discussion Paper
November 20, 2016

USING ‘value capture’ to help deliver more infrastructure is the subject of a discussion paper released last week by Urban Infrastructure Minister Paul Fletcher and Assistant Minister for Cities and Digital Transformation Angus Taylor.

The discussion paper examines the potential to more widely use value capture funding to supplement the billions of dollars each year already spent by all three levels of Australian governments on infrastructure.

It sets out a range of options for the Australian Government to action to stimulate the use of value capture in the development and delivery of infrastructure and describes various potential value capture approaches—including tools already in use by state and local governments.

(The NSW Government is investigating the use of value capture to help deliver the proposed Parramatta light rail project / Transport for NSW.)

Mr Fletcher said the Australian Government was seeking public and industry input on the value capture concept.

“Many states and territories already use value capture funding models to support major upgrades,” Mr Fletcher said.

“Similarly, developer charges are commonly used by local government authorities to help deliver utilities for new housing developments.

“If we are to make better use of value capture, governments must first understand why beneficiaries might be willing to pay for projects; identifying who these beneficiaries are and when they might materially gain from projects funded through this method.”

Mr Taylor said there was a need to find new funding models within the constrained fiscal environment.

“Government is getting smarter about linking transport investment with long term planning for affordable homes, closer to where people work and closer to services like schools and hospitals,” Mr Taylor said.

“Through City Deals, we are looking at changing the way we fund infrastructure.

“Encouraging public private partnerships to pay for road and rail corridors where land values will increase, can be a wise way to invest taxpayers’ money.”

Submissions on the discussion paper will be open until 3 February 2017. More information is available from the Department of Infrastructure and Regional Development website at