Hopefully, the solution is new boats that are a more sensible size, and don’t need the extensive infrastructure upgrades the new fleet would have required. One of the cancelled designs would have been a similar displacement to our current fleet of three.

I really hope the solution isn’t another clapped out beater from Europe.

  • @[email protected]
    link
    fedilink
    22 months ago

    Mate, the infrastructure is reaching end of life anyway and needs replacing.

    The benefit of doing it all at once is they were enlarging both terminals to allow better offloading of freight. Pay more now to spend less later.

    • @[email protected]OP
      link
      fedilink
      12 months ago

      I respect the sentiment, but the project was on track to be more than a billion dollars more than the initial estimates, which would have been a cost overrun of more than 100%

      That’s a colossal blow out.

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        22 months ago

        Yeah, I hear you on that. But my view is, that’s how much it cost. Cancelling it won’t make it cheaper in the future. Sometimes we just need to bite the bullet and pay for what we need.

        It’s more like an issue with initial quotes than the actual cost of the thing. The problem is, the public sees a big cost and screams “they’re wasting our money!”, but that’s not really it at all. The government is trying to invest in needed infrastructure that benefits all of us in the future. Literally their job.