This was published 3 years ago
‘Not ideal’: NSW government warned rushed airport metro would lead to cost blow-out
By Tom Rabe and Matt O'Sullivan
Government analysis of the western Sydney airport metro advised the state against trying to rush the delivery of the multi-billion dollar project in time for the airport’s opening, warning it could affect the cost.
The internal document outlining potential cost and timeline concerns was tabled to NSW Parliament less than 24 hours before a scathing Infrastructure Australia report was released on Friday, which found the benefits of the project did not justify its $11 billion price tag.
An artist’s impression of a train on the new Sydney airport metro line.
The Infrastructure Australia report recommended higher contingency funding for the metro given the strong demand for contractors amid a mega-project building boom on the country’s east coast.
Meanwhile, the government’s own business case evaluation summary, which was completed in November last year and tabled to state parliament under an upper house order, said the cost of building the metro would outweigh its benefit by $1.8 billion.
The analysis said a rush to open the metro by 2026, in time for the new airport at Badgerys Creek, could “present a challenge” to those trying to build it and warned the government against tampering with construction timelines.
“Timeframes should not be artificially compressed by governments, and delivery partners should be permitted to bid their delivery programs, interface arrangements and timings on a value-for-money and best for project basis,” the report said.
Transport Minister Andrew Constance at the site of the Western Sydney Airport.Credit: Jacky Ghossein
While the analysis of the business case said it had demonstrated strategic merit, it added escalating land costs around the airport presented “an ongoing cost risk for all projects in the area”.
The 23-kilometre rail line, which was a key feature of the Coalition’s 2019 state election campaign, is due to open in 2026 and will be jointly funded by the state and Commonwealth governments.
Despite a cost-benefit deficit from his own government’s business case and heavy criticism from the country’s peak independent infrastructure body, Transport Minister Andrew Constance believes the project will exceed projections.
“I can’t point to one example of a rail project which hasn’t exceeded our expectations, in terms of patronage, uplift and economic benefits over the past 10 years,” Mr Constance said in a statement.
“All of our rail projects have been extraordinary and I know this new Metro will be exactly the same.”
The Infrastructure Australia report also cast doubt over the future interconnectivity of the metro network, noting that the trains on the separate airport line were wider than those used on the rest of the network.
A Metro spokesman said the airport line trains would “technically be capable of running on other lines,” although it was never intended they would.
University of Sydney Business School transport and logistics management lecturer Dr Geoffrey Clifton said, while it made sense to make the airport line trains wider to fit people’s luggage, the fact that the metro lines did not connect was “not ideal”.
“There’s a logic behind having wider carriages for airport rail links. You’d be hard-pressed to fit people onto current metro carriages. But that means people going onto other networks will need to change trains,” Dr Clifton said.
“It’s a necessary evil. People don’t like to interchange.”
The Infrastructure Australia report said that some cost probability analysis of the airport metro “may be understated,” and below industry benchmarks.
Opposition transport spokesman Chris Minns said while it was vital the people of Western Sydney were provided with a link to the new airport, the government should not “end up paying double the price for it”.
An artist’s impression of one of the six stations on the airport line.Credit: NSW government
“This government made a big call on an isolated metro line rather than a heavy rail connection through Leppington. The pressure is now on Andrew Constance to justify the billions spent,” Mr Minns said.
The Infrastructure NSW business case evaluation summary pointed to the Commonwealth funding as a reason it presented a “value for money investment” for the state government.