In the previous article we looked at problems Phillip Island allegedly faces which a car ferry would solve, as outlined in the recently released Cowes to Stony Point Car Ferry Draft Business Case document.
The next section of the Draft Business Case is called Benefits.
This section starts off by suggesting that the three benefits that would be delivered with a car ferry between Phillip Island and the Mornington Peninsula are:
- Regional economic growth and investment
- A more inclusive and productive community
- A safer community
Out of 100% importance rating, the Draft Business Case document gave the regional economic growth and investment a 60% importance rating and the remaining two each given 20%.
The regional economic growth and investment that the Draft Business Case suggested was based wholly and totally on increasing the number of tourists to the Phillip Island and the Mornington Peninsula.
In fact, the document was quoted as saying “… higher levels of tourism and additional visitor yield are critical to the future prosperity of Mornington Peninsula and Phillip Island.”
So how is this going to be achieved with the provision of a car ferry?
To achieve such a goal would be to establish a globally competitive coastal touring route by using the Cowes to Stony Point Car Ferry.
To support their statements, the author of the Draft Business Case document, AECOM, uses three international case studies.
The first example involves the BC Ferries in Canada. This extensive car ferry network connects Vancouver Island to the mainland of British Columbia, Canada. It is an island almost 500 kms long that is completely isolated from the mainland. The only way of travelling to Vancouver Island from the mainland is by airplane, or car ferry. It is 50 kilometres from the mainland, a three hour one way trip from Vancouver and there are no bridges.
It is considered a one-way destination; the term used to describe Phillip Island; except it should be noted Phillip Island has a bridge.
BC Ferries history goes back to 1901 and in 1958 it was taken over by the BC Government to ensure a reliable service to Vancouver Island. It was not established as a tourist service, but as an essential service to connect the island to the mainland.
The next example chosen was the Clare County and Shannon County ferry service in Ireland. Again, the ferry service was established in 1968 by six families in order to get supplies and their personal vehicles across the River Shannon. It is now a busy tourist service.
However, we contacted Shannon Ferries and asked them if the service had seasonal troughs where the tourists avoided the ferry. They sent us this graph. (Keep in mind that summer in Ireland is June through September.)
The problem with using Shannon Ferries as an example is that another benefit the Draft Business Case suggested is and we quote, “… another component of this benefit would be the dispersal of visitors across regional Victoria and attenuation to the high level of tourist seasonality.”
The author of the Draft Business Case is suggesting that tourists will use the ferry in the winter and this will increase tourist visitation to Phillip Island during the slower periods. Not only is this impractical, but simply misleading, the example of Shannon Ferries the author used in the Draft Business Case document proves this.
The last example, was the Helgelandskysten ferry services in Norway.
Helgelandskysten in Norway runs three car ferries. On their website they have made some interesting statements.
First they have stated that, “In the Autumn, Winter, and Spring, the ferries are seldom full, while there may be queues and waiting times in the Summer”.
In fact, some of those ferries are only operating in the SUMMER.
Secondly, the website stated that, “Bridges and tunnels have made many ferries obsolete…”
In an article in this paper on 7 February this year, Mark Olsen the consultant from EarthCheck wrote that almost 13 percent of the touring market visits other parts of Victoria during the winter season and only 1 percent comes to Phillip Island.
This was quoted as being from a National and International Survey 2017. We were unable to find this report and requested a copy from Mark Olsen. He said that it is proprietary information of EarthCheck that the Bass Coast Shire has not paid for.
Therefore, we will just have to assume that this data does not exist.
Furthermore, the author of the Draft Business Case is quoted as saying “…the creation of major touring route including Mornington Peninsula and Phillip Island will open up these regions to a new class of touring visitors, which are more likely to visit outside existing peak seasons.”
This unfortunately disagrees with the concept that a car ferry to Phillip Island will bring more visitors during the winter season.
The second benefit of a car ferry stated in the Draft Business Case document was to create a more inclusive and productive community.
The author of the Draft Business Case document stated that this benefit would occur simply by offering travel time savings.
The author stated the following:
“Survey work undertaken on behalf of both Bass Coast Shire and Mornington Peninsula Shire indicates that there is a high level of support among residents for a vehicle ferry concept between Cowes and Stony Point. Overall, 79 percent of Bass Coast Shire residents and 84 percent of Mornington Peninsula Shire residents supported the project.”
Draft Business Case, Page 17
If the reader looks closely they would see that the survey they are talking about was from a report produced by Meinhardt Infrastructure & Environment Pty Ltd in 2009 called Stony Point – Cowes Vehicular Ferry Project – Consultation & Research Summary, 2009.
Two questions should come to mind:
One is why they are referring to a report that is nine years old and secondly, if the support was so strong, why then does Phillip Island not have a car ferry by now?
Still they suggest that it is time savings that is a key benefit of having a Cowes to Stony Point car ferry.
Another question would be, will there actually be that much of a time saving?
In an earlier article we suggested there will not.
In a subsequent article 7 February this year, Mark Olsen the consultant from EarthCheck refuted our assumptions by presenting reduced sailing times and waiting times in order that the result looked like there will be a time saving, albeit minimal.
The sailing times and waiting times Mark used in this article then showed up in the Draft Business Case document; word for word.
This is at odds with what Mark Olsen stated in a presentation on 5 October 2017 to a number of people, where he stated that the allowance was 15 minutes to load, 45 minutes sailing time, 15 minutes to disembark.
It is quite easy to manipulate numbers (especially when they cannot be challenged) to present a result that is shown to support a claim, in this case time savings.
Suggesting that it would only take 10 minutes to wait while the ferry unloads and then reloads is quite frankly, farcical.
Just a slight variation to this waiting time alone would start to erode the small time savings that one could experience using the car ferry.
Then to suggest that Phillip Island residents travelling to work, shopping, school or to visit medical services would spend $120 round trip to save a few very questionable minutes, would simply be irresponsible.
Yet, that is what the author of the Draft Business Case document is proposing.
In fact, the author of the Draft Business Case document is even suggesting that only 1 percent of Phillip Island residents travel to the Mornington Peninsula for work. They expect to grow when a car ferry service is in operation.
At $120 per day return (say $2400 a month), it would seem to most people that this again, would be highly unlikely—and in fact—quite ludicrous.
The final benefit that the Draft Business Case outlined, was to provide a safer community.
To most residents a safer community would consists of a community free from crime, quality health services and safer roads, just to name a few obvious factors.
This is not what the Draft Business Case document is suggesting.
Instead, AECOM, the author of the Draft Business Case is actually suggesting that a safer community for Phillip Island is one that provides a car ferry to be used for evacuation.
It also suggests that a safer community is one that does not experience traffic congestion, which a car ferry will resolve.
It even suggests that a car ferry will allow residents to access medical services and education providers.
In our previous article we explained how ridiculous it is to assume that a car ferry would even come close to relieving any traffic congestion.
We have already shown that most individuals would laugh at anyone who would suggest students would spend $120 per day to go to school, college or university.
In the previous article we also explained why a car ferry could not be a viable service to be relied upon in emergencies.
But AECOM stated that “this perspective has been supported in a letter from the Emergency Management Commissioner”.
We have obtained a copy of this letter. It was sent to Mr Paul Buckley the Chief Executive Officer of the Bass Coast Shire Council and starts off by confirming a meeting between Mr Buckley and Cr Pamela Rothfield, the Mayor of the Bass Coast Shire.
It was provided by Mr Craig Lapsley, the Emergency Management Commissioner of Victoria.
Mr Craig Lapsley, on behalf of Emergency Management, does provide support in principle of the development of a business case for a car ferry that includes the opportunity for improved access and egress to Phillip Island.
Mr Craig Lapsley goes on to say in the letter, “…notionally provide a significant alternative means of accessing Phillip Island and French Island for both community and emergency services.”
We contacted Mr Craig Lapsley on several occasions to ask what data he or his department had available that underpinned their support for a car ferry as this letter suggested.
We have yet to receive a response.
For those who do not know what the word ‘notionally’ means, it means speculative, imaginary or theoretical. Actually, not a bad definition for this car ferry project.
Next week we will dig deeper into the Draft Business Case. It gets even more interesting and not in a good way.
There is one last comment we must make.
Our goal is to encourage you to begin asking questions.
Questions not only about the reasonableness of the need to have a car ferry, but also the process in which the various stakeholders, including your own local government are involved to get this project across the line.
We urge you to start writing those questions down. You DO have a voice.