Weaknesses in the Draft New England North West Strategic Regional Integrated Transport Plan (SRITP)

Why the Draft Plan Fails Regional Rail and Integrated Transport?

1. The Draft Plan Acknowledges Problems — But Avoids Real Solutions

The draft repeatedly recognises:
poor public transport
transport disadvantage
isolation of regional communities
heavy dependence on cars
poor cross-border connectivity
demand for passenger rail north of Armidale
freight pressure on roads
need for lower emissions
Yet the proposed solutions are mostly:

more buses
cycling infrastructure
rail trails
road upgrades

There is no serious commitment to restoring regional rail connectivity north of Armidale.

2. The Draft Ignores Community Calls for Rail Reinstatement

3. Contradiction: “Integrated Transport” Without Rail

4. Over-Reliance on Private Vehicles is Identified — But Not Addressed

5. Bus Services Alone Cannot Meet Regional Transport Needs.

6. Rail Trail Support is Premature and Biased.

7. Inland Rail Assumptions Are Now Outdated

Large parts of the draft rely on Inland Rail assumptions.

However:

the Federal Government decision to terminate Inland Rail at Parkes changes the strategic context significantly
claims about freight transformation and Queensland connectivity now require reassessment
the draft still refers to Moree/Narrabri-focused intermodal expansion despite uncertainty

The Plan should now examine:

alternative freight strategies
restoration of Main North corridor options
future Armidale–Glen Innes–Tenterfield freight opportunities
cross-border rail connectivity
The draft requires recalibration before finalisation.

8. The Draft Fails Cross-Border Communities

no rail solution is proposed
no serious cross-border passenger rail strategy exists
no future corridor protection strategy is outlined

9. Freight Strategy is Contradictory

no freight rail expansion north of Armidale is proposed
no long-term Main North preservation strategy exists
rail corridor reuse for trails is discussed before future freight needs are assessed

This contradicts the Plan’s own freight objectives.

why does the draft not seriously examine expansion of freight rail capacity,
restoration of the Main North line,
or future freight opportunities north of Armidale. 
the Plan acknowledges rail is critical for freight,
but simultaneously discusses converting strategic rail corridors into recreational trails.

10. Climate and Net Zero Goals Are Not Credible Without Rail.

Key Requests to Transport for NSW

Rail supporters could ask TfNSW to:

Remove or revise statements supporting rail trail conversion until formal NSW Government decisions are made.
Undertake a feasibility study into reinstating rail north of Armidale.
Preserve the Main North rail corridor for future freight and passenger use.
Include cross-border rail options to Queensland in long-term planning.
Reassess the Plan following Federal Inland Rail changes.
Develop a genuine multi-modal integrated transport strategy.
Improve rail services between Armidale and Sydney.
Investigate future intermodal opportunities in Armidale, Glen Innes and Tenterfield.
Include staged rail restoration options in the final Plan.
Align regional transport planning with emissions reduction objectives.

How to Send your Views about the Draft Plan to the Planning Team in TFNSW?

The planning team in tfnsw has designed a quick survey to easily provide your feedback also. Focused on the Key Directions of the Draft Plan, you can easily navigate your way through to provide feedback on what matters most to you.

Alternatively, you can upload a submission or send your feedback by emailing

 engage.sritps@transport.nsw.gov.au

If you want to UPLOAD the submission first write it preferably in a word document. Then upload.

The link to the website is 

https://www.haveyoursay.nsw.gov.au/sritp/new-england-and-north-west

The consultation period closes on Sunday 14 June, 2026.