And it is a very big elephant; the bipartisan target is over 200,000 for 2015/16, about the population of Hobart.
The best evidence weíve got indicates that motorists do in fact pay the full
financial cost of building and maintaining the roads they require.
Why this obsession with preservation even when it comes to structures that are clearly redundant or structurally deficient?
The 30-minute city is the big urban policy idea both the Government and the Opposition are bringing to the election. But how realistic is it?
Regional development and decentralisation are rhetorical favourites of Australian politicians but they're really promoting regional sprawl over suburban sprawl.
But how far could billions of dollars in new rail infrastructure actually go in improving congestion across our cities? Will cars inevitably win? If so, why?
No government has ever offered to be the primary investor in a significant development project anywhere in the north of our continent.
80% of our land mass is sparsely populated and poorly serviced by internet, hospitals, water, railways, roads and ports.
It already contains the seeds of failure Ė an existing, ingrained culture of family disability fraud and embezzlement that has been operating openly and arrogantly in Australia for years.
The Prime Minister's embrace of east coast High Speed Rail and his spinning of value capture removes any doubt he's just as cynical and opportunistic as Labor and the Greens.
As Iíve discussed before, what proponents of this view donít get is that while big cities provide greater diversity (and are rightly lauded for it), they also provide more opportunities for specialisation.
After several decades of increasingly sophisticated strategic town planning, community angst and confusion - along with industry annoyance - continues to test new lows.