24 September 2020 - TMR Consultation Summary Report

Originally written 24 September, last updated 27 September 2020.

Today, I realised that in my initial shock at the published Consultation Summary, I skipped one important thing. 

First, why was I shocked? Because, suddenly, the whole consultation we knew about: the web survey, the web feedback form, the face to face sessions, the emails, the phone calls, was disregarded by the TMR, and pushed to the back of their report as non-scientific, anecdotal, non-representative, and skewed by people with vested interest.

Instead, they publicised and everyone - the newspapers, the environmental organisations, and even the Gold Coast Greens as I’ve learned a few days ago - picked up and accepted their statements:

"An independent survey of Gold Coast residents and businesses has shown overwhelming support for the Coomera Connector"

"Research has told us that the vast majority (80%) of the community support the Coomera Connector being built as soon as possible to provide an alternative to the Pacific Motorway (M1)."

TMR do not want to make public the details of the community consultation, only providing us with a Summary Report, but even that is telling if you read it carefully. Here it is:

https://www.tmr.qld.gov.au/_/media/projects/c/coomera-connector/coomera-connector-community-consultation-summary.pdf

It shows that the consultation had two parts: part one done by TMR, which was delayed multiple times and finally started 8 November 2019. It was widely publicised well before that. Our petition to the Qld Parliament against the Coomera Connector was published on facebook already on 4 September and posted to the Parliament on 20 September 2019:

https://www.parliament.qld.gov.au/work-of-assembly/petitions/petition-details?id=3203

TMR sent out newsletters, ran radio, newspaper and facebook ads.

Was it representative? 3,200 visits to the website, 593 online surveys and feedback forms, 2086 people attended community sessions, 700+ pieces of feedback received. 

Eagleby and Coomera residents would be most affected by Stage 2.

Helensvale residents would be most affected by Stage 1 - they would be sandwiched between the 8-lane 110 km/h M1 and the 6-lane 100 km/h Second M1.

What was the answer to the most important question: 

“Do you support the Coomera Connector as a transport solution?”

47.1% said "No". 14.2% were unsure. 38.7% said "Yes".

The opinion of people most knowledgeable about the project and most affected by it. Disregarded. Thrown into the bin. 

....

And part two, which started 10 days after the TMR web survey opened. I didn’t know about that part. I don’t remember the TMR website mentioning it. Why was a private company (colmar brunton) hired instead of TMR doing it themselves? Was it a quick decision on the part of the Labor party to get the result they wanted? Did TMR not want to do it, or could not do it given the short time frame? We know the Premier announced the start of work ($20m business case) two weeks before the consultation officially started:

The same thing is happening again. The business case is to be completed in July 2021, but the Labor party already announced $755m for the works to be started in the middle of next year. Why did we bother with public consultation at all? Why do we bother with the business case now? The politicians already know the result.

If the business case was to be done honestly, it should show the environmental, health, and lost productivity costs of different uses of the public land reserved currently for the Coomera Connector.

………

Going back to part two of the public consultations. There are a few additional things that are fishy about it:

We don’t know the script of these 18 minute phone conversations. Why is the script secret? Were the participants steered into answering questions in a certain way? What were they told about the project? We know that 29% of the people who provided answers were not even aware of the project. They did not see the maps. They did not know how close to homes it would go. 

Were they told that the road was always there and whoever bought the house next to it should have known? This is not true. The Newman government removed the IRTC (Intra-Regional Transport Corridor) from the maps in early 2014. The light rail extension to Helensvale was built in that corridor. Alternative developments were planned in the northern section. People buying homes in Arundel, Helensvale and Coomera did not know about a road next to their homes, because it was not on the maps. It started being gazetted again in March 2016 by the Palaszczuk government as Coomera Connector. Some sections of this road have never been gazetted before. 

Were people told about the health effects of living close to a major road? About the conservation areas that would be destroyed? Were people told that any congestion reduction on M1 might not materialise or might disappear quickly, because of induced demand - because people who try to not use M1 now, will start using it more. 

Were they told that if Coomera Connector is built as a motorway, it will enable further car-oriented population growth in northern Gold Coast and Logan (600,000 new residents by 2041), and therefore it will become as busy as the M1?

So, what have I skipped?

Can you see it? Apart from measuring perceptions only about road infrastructure projects - not giving people an option of fast rail, which according to a recent Courier Mail sentiment survey was identified as the most critical southeast Queensland project by 50% of the respondents, while Coomera Connector got only 15%... 

Colmar Brunton only asked people who use the major motorways at least 2 times a week!

Was the "Use SEQ major freeways/motorways 2+ times a week" parameter given by the TMR or something that Colmar Brunton introduced to get the result expected by the TMR? How many people/businesses did Colmar Brunton call to get the 1000 they wanted? How would the results look like if it was 1+ times a week, or if that parameter was removed? 

What is the rationale of assigning 10% of the sample to businesses and 90% to residents? These two groups are not the same. A business often has multiple people/cars. What are the percentages of businesses and residents that use a major motorway at least twice a week? Many businesses don't mind being located next to a motorway, because they have windowless walls on that side. Most residents care.  

Even if they called me, they wouldn't include my opinion, because I use public transport. If they called my wife, they would also not include her opinion, because she does not drive on the M1 at least 2 times a week. We both live in Coomera and the Coomera Connector, if built as a 6 lane motorway (easily capable of moving 120,000 cars per day), will have a huge negative impact on us. What is a major motorway anyway? Did they also exclude people who only use the Smith Street Motorway? They excluded people who live in Surfers or Broadbeach or Labrador and do not use the M1 at all. They will be impacted too, because Coomera Connector will be bringing thousands more cars to their suburbs. They excluded people who walk, bike or use public transport for work or school. They excluded many retirees, students, and people who work from home. How is that "broadly representative" as the TMR claims? How much of the community was excluded? My guess would be that about a half. Now re-read how the consultation results were reported:

"Research has told us that the vast majority (80%) of the community support the Coomera Connector being built as soon as possible to provide an alternative to the Pacific Motorway (M1)."

A closer to truth summary of the quantitative information from the public consultation is this:

1. "Of the people who filled our web survey, more are against the Coomera Connector, than for it."

2. "We hired a private firm who got most people who use M1 at least twice a week, to say they support building a Second M1."

The "most" is also not 80%, because not all people who supported the Coomera Connector, wanted it to be a motorway i.e. "Second M1". 84% did, and 84% of 80% is 67%. 

There is confusion about what Second M1 and Coomera Connector actually mean.

The term Second M1 was introduced by LNP and currently is defined at https://www.lnp.org.au/roads-plan/ as "a 4-lane arterial road from Nerang-Broadbeach Road to Stapylton-Jacobs Well Road." - note that an arterial road does not need to be a motorway. In Australia it means just a state road as opposed to a local road. Most arterial roads in Australia are not motorways. In North America, "arterial road" is not a motorway. Typically arterial roads have speed limits between 50 and 80 km/h. 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hierarchy_of_roads

The term Coomera Connector was introduced by Labor. During consultation the public was asked if it should be a 4-lane or 6-lane, a motorway or a lower speed road with intersections. Now it means a motorway, but is also called Second M1 on the TMR page, and is 45 km long: from the Logan Motorway and Pacific Motorway interchange at Loganholme to Nerang–Broadbeach Road in Nerang.

There is also confusion about what the predecessor of the Coomera Connector, the IRTC was and how long it was supposed to be. For example, Andrew Potts wrote in the Gold Coast Bulletin on 22 April 2016:

"Nearly two years after being scrapped by the former Newman government, the Inter-Regional Transport Corridor (IRTC), an 18.5km arterial corridor from Carrara to Coomera, has been restored as a future project. [...] The re-gazetting of the project means no development can be carried out along the corridor which will one day carry a two-way, four-lane road between Nerang-Broadbeach Rd and Foxwell Rd."

----------------------------------------------------------------------

The original media statement ending the public consultation is very misleading: 

https://statements.qld.gov.au/statements/89958

I marked red statements that omit critical information. I put explanations in [square brackets]: 

Survey shows strong support for Coomera Connector [The web survey shows the opposite]

Published Friday, 05 June, 2020 at 08:33 AM

Minister for Transport and Main Roads
The Honourable Mark Bailey

An independent survey of Gold Coast residents and businesses has shown overwhelming support for the Coomera Connector. [The phone survey was not independent - TMR hired a company to do it. The script is secret. The detailed results are secret. It would be independent if it was done transparently and paid for by an independent body. It omitted residents and businesses who do not use major motorways at least twice a week. It would be fair if it told the surveyed people about the history of this transport corridor, including the fact that it was un-gazetted by the Newman government, exactly how close to homes it is, health impacts of living next to a major road, destruction of conservation areas, costs, impact of induced demand on traffic congestion, public and active transport alternatives.]

[...]

Federal Minister for Population, Cities and Urban Infrastructure Alan Tudge said Gold Coast residents had backed the plan to get the Coomera Connector underway. [Neither survey was restricted to Gold Coast residents only. The web survey showed the opposite of what is claimed here. The known phone survey results are only from people who use the major motorways at least twice a week.]

[...]

Queensland Minister for Transport and Main Roads Mark Bailey said four out of five people who answered the independent survey last November backed the M1 alternative.

“This was an independent survey of 1,000 residents and businesses spread out between Loganholme and Coolangatta,” Mr Bailey said. [see above]

[...]

State Member for Gaven Meaghan Scanlon said more than 2,000 people attended a series of community drop-in sessions run in late 2019 and more than 700 individual pieces of feedback were also received.

“Eighty per cent of those surveyed supported the Coomera Connector overall and 76 per cent supported the priority Stage 1 section between Coomera and Nerang,” Ms Scanlon said. [Putting these two paragraphs one after another may mislead readers to think that the 80% and 76% numbers are connected to the 2000 and 700 numbers. The web survey results are omitted.]

---------------------------------------------------------------------

I've decided to look again at the TMR project page:

https://www.tmr.qld.gov.au/projects/Coomera-Connector

...and what am I finding there?

Community consultation on the Coomera Connector was held between 8 November and 8 December 2019.

The consultation program included a series of 10 community drop in sessions along the 45km project corridor, plus online engagement activities.

There was significant interest from the community with 3,200 visits to the website, more than 2,000 people visiting the community drop in sessions to talk to the project team, and 700 pieces of feedback received.

A telephone survey of 1,000 residents and businesses revealed 4 out of 5 people in the project corridor area support the introduction of the Coomera Connector.

That's simply a lie. That's not what the phone survey revealed. If the term Coomera Connector now means only a motorway, then the survey revealed that 4 out of 6 of the people who use M1 (or some other major motorway) at least twice a week, supported it, and we still don't know what they were told about it by the interviewers.