<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: $1.2 billion says it&#8217;s a failed experiment</title>
	<atom:link href="http://treadly.net/2006/04/10/public-transport-failed-experiment/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://treadly.net/2006/04/10/public-transport-failed-experiment/</link>
	<description>Work is just something I do between bike rides</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Tue, 03 Jan 2012 06:01:19 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.2.1</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: Phil</title>
		<link>http://treadly.net/2006/04/10/public-transport-failed-experiment/comment-page-1/#comment-77</link>
		<dc:creator>Phil</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 10 Apr 2006 09:56:17 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://treadly.thingoid.com/?p=80#comment-77</guid>
		<description>&lt;p&gt;The Govt response is a triumph of ideology over evidence based research. It&#039;s a complex issue that demands a proper response from the Govt other than outright dismissal.&lt;/p&gt;

&lt;p&gt;Economist &lt;a href=&quot;http://kalimna.blogspot.com/2006/04/melbournes-transport-again-again.html&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;Harry Clarke&lt;/a&gt; has a few thoughts on the Age editorial.&lt;/p&gt;

&lt;blockquote&gt;The issue of bringing tram and train sector operations back into the public fold is not one that I would necessarily disagree with. These services have a substantial natural monopoly element and it is unsurprising that regulated private operation does not provide an ideal service. Many economists look dubiously at the prospect of achieving efficiency gains from such privatisations. But I am very skeptical at the prospect of bringing the bus service back into private hands as The Age suggests is being advocated.&lt;/blockquote&gt;

&lt;p&gt;He&#039;s posting quite often on Melb transport issues. Well worth the challenging read.&lt;/p&gt;
</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>The Govt response is a triumph of ideology over evidence based research. It&#8217;s a complex issue that demands a proper response from the Govt other than outright dismissal.</p>

<p>Economist <a href="http://kalimna.blogspot.com/2006/04/melbournes-transport-again-again.html" rel="nofollow">Harry Clarke</a> has a few thoughts on the Age editorial.</p>

<blockquote>The issue of bringing tram and train sector operations back into the public fold is not one that I would necessarily disagree with. These services have a substantial natural monopoly element and it is unsurprising that regulated private operation does not provide an ideal service. Many economists look dubiously at the prospect of achieving efficiency gains from such privatisations. But I am very skeptical at the prospect of bringing the bus service back into private hands as The Age suggests is being advocated.</blockquote>

<p>He&#8217;s posting quite often on Melb transport issues. Well worth the challenging read.</p>]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

