[Kharon]

'Twas on the good ship Venus -
The head count did deceive us
Three hundred souls we took on board
without record kept of that great hoard.

The wind it blew so very hard,
Our vessel struggled for every yard
Just to get to dock was hard,
For big seas did fight us. very hard.

At last we sighted that circular quay
and what a sight it was to see; 500 waiting patiently.
Sick and weary the hoard stumbled away;
happy to leave that circular quay.

All 'cept one, sad to say. They found young Charlie;
yesterday: 300 souls we took on board
despite the prohibitions. Raw profit was our mission.
Had we counted them off and on,
we may have saved Mother Riley's son.

500 more the corporate shout. Hurry up and turn about;
and 'steering'? 'You can do without'
Back into the wind and brine to make our wages we dared
for no one left behind really cared.  Anon..

Perhaps it's time for Chris Minns to start asking some questions of the very 'suspect' safety management practices, operational edicts and maybe 'strict' compliance with promulgated operational requirements and those charged with oversight of the system.

A fair place to begin the discussion is in defining 'what purpose' the ferry system was intended to provide. Back in the day, the Freshwater Class ferry was purpose built, by folk who knew their business. Built strong to provide for the needs of the travelling public. The boats were 'fit for purpose' and built to a high standard. The design allowed the boat to be 'conned' from either end, which makes perfect sense given timetable and practical operations. The boats were designed and built to withstand the Southerly swells with a full load of over 1000 passengers. They could off-load and load similar numbers and managed, most of the time to meet the demands placed on the 'service' (to the public, by the public and for the public) who paid for that service; through tax and fare. Reliable, safe as houses, robust and sound.

Can the public still place their faith in the 'service' being provided today? The 'new' boats may only be 'conned' from the wheel house; needing to 'back and fill' before heading off; this takes time, which demands a modified schedule; this leads to a reduced schedule or reduce 'payload'. To accommodate this glaring flaw, they are restricted to a mere 250 passengers rather than the four hundred touted. Sure they may – seas permitting, may be able to make up the time due additional 'foot speed' but then there must be, by simple maths, a serious increase in service to meet demand. To accommodate these service shortfalls in the real world, they need their own 'dock'. You can see the problems – to meet the 1000 passenger demand (per run) at peak; restricted to only 250 passengers; you need to quadruple the fleet, then provide docking – at both ends.  This to meet the same service the Freshwater provided – almost effortlessly. It don't make sense from an operational, service or fiscal POV. Not to mention the increased costs and investments must be met by those who use the service. Crazy stuff. Try that with an air service and see how you get on..........

Then, the always lurking spectres of 'money', political credibility, money, influence, money and at the tag end – the 'safety of 'those at peril on the sea' Oh, and money.

Let's begin with money. Transdev ain't by any stretch a 'not for profit outfit' one, be a mug to believe that. Altruistic by nature and default, without a philanthropic bone in their body. I have a rather lovely bridge to sell to anyone who believes that providing the very best service to the travelling public of Sydney is their top corporate goal. Question on Notice – are they on a pro rata pay day; or, a fixed fee for service provided? Does this matter? Course it does. The simple difference between 400 tickets clipped every 90 minutes and 250 tickets clipped in the same time period may, just, perhaps make a small difference. Then there are the government coffers to consider :– who underwrote the design, construction, training and startup costs for the 'new' whizz bang ferry service?. Wouldn't be the tax payer or travelling public carrying that burden would it now – Nah. Wheels within wheels, deals within deals: every body happy except mutt number 251 denied travel, who has to wait 20 minutes for the next one.

It may benefit the minister or Minns to find a watering hole where those who work within the system have a quiet Ale or two even. Always a good yarn or two, (even three on occasion) all the 'goss', rumours, tales and mysteries all quietly spoken of in good fellowship. Should, for some esoteric reason, meeting with the Hoi-Polloi be beyond the pale; there's always the large pile of 'safety' reports and Masters logs to spend an evening with. - Never know, perhaps the rumours of a gross overload may be discovered; or, the very real difficulties of managing the 'new' boats may be revealed. Who knows until the reading is done..

Something is very, very wrong with what should be a very good service to a harbour city. A world wide icon of a harbour, a gateway to a nation, with a third world ferry service to a first world city. Safety and service should be peerless; a thing of national pride. Well, lets all hope that there is never a serious event which has not only a track record of attempted disaster; but unimpeachable evidence that it could all have been avoided. As we say in our game – think safety is expensive – try an accident.

Sods law of the ocean is prime; the clock is ticking and sooner or later, if not remedied soon, the wheel is going to fall off this muddied wagon of 'deliverable' outcomes and deniable responsibility. But then, what's a minister or two in this great land; cannon fodder is cheap in the corporate world, where safety watchdogs are an empire building clerical quango, and very easily (as demonstrated) muzzled. 

Shame on the whole sorry lot; we paid for 'better' – no :: stopping right there; I may just be getting a touch irritated.

Toot – toot....