Remember when they had vision

It seems Prime Minister Anthony Albanese does. In Brisbane this week he…

Secret Agreements: The Australian-Israel Defence Memorandum of Understanding

While the Australian government continues to pirouette with shallow constancy on the…

Government heat map ‘wake up call’ to stop…

Climate Media Centre Advocacy groups have welcomed the release of the Federal Government’s…

Compulsory income management doing more harm than good:…

Charles Darwin University Media Release Compulsory income management (CIM) in the Northern Territory…

Flicker of Hope: Biden’s Throwaway Lines on Assange

Walking stiffly, largely distracted, and struggling to focus on the bare essentials,…

Seizing a Future Made in Australia

Climate Council Media Release THE CLIMATE COUNCIL celebrates today's announcement that the Future…

The Meanjin essay: The Voice and Australia's democracy…

With Stephen Charles AO KC The dire state of truth in Australia’s civic…

Haunted by waters

By James Moore We were young when we lived near the Rio Grande…


Meaningless Titles and Liveable Cities: Melbourne loses to Vienna

The Economist Intelligence Unit (EIU) has gone about its annual business of releasing its World’s Most Liveable City index, the sort of flotsam that matters less to urban planners than hedge-fund managers. The previous seven time winner had been Melbourne, whose supposed ascendancy had been threatened, at points, by Vancouver and Vienna. Now, the Austrian capital has assumed the mantle, and various notes of despair and qualifications are noted.

Like any other index, a false plausibility can be gained from reading its findings. The indicators are all measures of corporate mobility and comfort, rather than urban sensibility and civic value. Companies must be assured that their employees will be able to live and work in suitably salubrious surrounds, with a degree of safety. Bottom lines and share prices are fundamental in these calculations.

The EIU makes no bones about it, its historical mission sounding much like an advisory role to rampant mercantilism. “Created in 1946,” the unit notes in its 2018 liveability index report, “we have over 70 years’ experience in helping businesses, financial firms and governments to understand how the world is changing and how that creates opportunities to be seized and risks to be managed.” The EIU, goes a summarising paragraph of its goals, “helps business leaders prepare for opportunity, empowering them to act with confidence when making strategic decisions.” The unit aspires to analytical sharpness, “uncompromising integrity, relentless rigour and precise communication.” All this, in the name of suitably gathered “business intelligence.”

The scores confirm this impression. Last year, Melbourne attained a score of 97.5: 95.1 for culture and environment and scores of 100 for healthcare, education and infrastructure. This replicated the results of 2016. What pushed Vienna to the top was its improvement in the “stability category.” “The two cities,” goes the unit’s analytical tone, “are now separated by 0.7 of a percentage point, with Vienna scoring a near-ideal 99.1 out of 100 and Melbourne scoring 98.4.”

Through the report, the same themes for the corporate manager and financial planner are emphasised. “Upwards movement in the top ranked cities is a reflection of improvements seen in stability and safety across most regions in the past year.” Much cheer could be had for the “return to normalcy” in Europe, given past concerns of a “perceived threat to terrorism in the region”.

Such essentially fluffy titles serve one purpose: to confer a sort of abysmal complacency that suggests smugness. Former Lord Mayor Robert Doyle suggested in a media release last year that those taking issue with these accolades were the party pooping “naysayers and whingers”. To be deemed the most liveable city for a seventh straight year was not merely a “world record” but “an amazing feat that all Melburnians should be extremely proud of.”

The competitive edge to such rankings is also illusory at best. Cities are treated like race horses, where “gaps” are closed and contenders overtaken at the last turn. “Vienna shot up the Economist Intelligence Unit’s chart,” went the ABC. Osaka, goes the 2018 report, “stands out especially, having climbed six positions, to third place, over the past six months, closing the gap with Melbourne.”

But Melbourne could still claim to have an edge over the crowned city in other areas, with the ABC making a weak effort to convince readers of the finer points of living down under. Winters, for instance, were milder than those in Vienna (this ignores the lack of central heating and poor design of Melbourne’s structures in coping with its milder winter). Melbourne boasted better street art (the premise is dubious), even if Vienna was a thriving “open air museum” aged in culture; and Melbourne’s variant of the classic Wiener schnitzel was “more evolved”, with additions of sauce, ham and parmesan.

A relevant point with such labels is whether they are even necessary. In April, as if with a premonition, Gay Alcorn would note that the city was “weighed own by its gong as the ‘world’s most liveable city’; it was “uneasy about where it’s going, uncertain whether it wants to be a global megacity doubling its population to eight million by mid-century, or hang on to its charms.”

Melbourne was already a city floating on illusions and letting go of what charms it might have had. Its legendary tram network has excellent coverage centrally, but falters in the suburban areas, which are sprawling and continue to grow. Its metropolitan train system is creaky. Promised train lines to various outer suburbs remain the stuff of fantasy. Outside the sacred inner ring of public transport is darkness, where the automobile remains not only supreme but necessary. Access to the main airport remains marred by an absence of a train connection.

For the urban watchers, the fall of Melbourne was nothing short of a relief. Clay Lucas noted indifference from many readers of the local paper, The Age, when the city first topped the liveability tag. On its seventh top ranking, seething anger was noted. “Tell a Doreen or Point Cook resident, trapped on arterial feeder roads morning and night, that this city is as good as it gets.”

Realities in the business of ranking cities vary accordingly. If one were to consult the findings of the engineering outfit Arcadis, Melbourne comes in at 21st in terms of being most expensive for building new infrastructure, while ranking at a lowly 55th for sustainable transport. But such analysis is bound to be dismissed by Victoria’s political chatterboxes as inconsequential in the battle of meaningless titles. The corporate classes come first.


Like what we do at The AIMN?

You’ll like it even more knowing that your donation will help us to keep up the good fight.

Chuck in a few bucks and see just how far it goes!

Your contribution to help with the running costs of this site will be gratefully accepted.

You can donate through PayPal or credit card via the button below, or donate via bank transfer: BSB: 062500; A/c no: 10495969

Donate Button


Login here Register here
  1. New England Cocky

    Smart business persons move to urban regional centres where the air is clean and less polluted, the county is open, housing is affordable and cars are essential transport because politicians rarely move away from the comfort of metropolitan cities.

    But in the 20th century regional centres grew in spite of the metropolitan bias of politicians and senior public servants.

    Regional universities became established, electricity arrived on power grids, communications improved so that most mobile towers are functional, but mass transport systems for both freight and passengers remain abysmal.

    Why spend over 30 minutes, twice a day, travelling to work as a metropolitan desk jockey when for a fraction of the cost of a metropolitan suburban residence, work can be just 5 minutes down the road? Think of the savings in time, petrol and expense.

    Now we have one political party speaking up for urban regional centres by demanding 20% tax cut for all businesses and workers living outside 200m of metropolitan cities. A sensible policy that government could employ to advantage for government departments.

    Every government job in a urban regional centre creates about 3.5 private sector jobs. So, moving say 100 government jobs to an urban regional centres would create a further 350 private sector jobs. Now say each job supports Mum, Dad and two kids, then 4 x (100 + 350) = 1800 persons are decentralised and a local economic boom is seated in that regional centre.

    Oh silly me!!! Politics is about paying out free cash gifts to your metropolitan foreign banker mates rather than creating a better healthier community for all Australian citizens.

  2. Wam

    Melbourne (5m)as the world’s most liveable city has been a standing joke for the other 20 million australians.
    Vienna(1.7m) is probably a joke for the other 7 million austrians.

    Still the gangs have made the difference and relegated the worst city in Australia to number 2 in the world.

    We live in a truly marvellous country.

  3. Michael Taylor

    These people who said Melbourne was the most liveable city in the world: did they ever try driving in it?

    I’ve never driven in Vienna, so that could be bad too. But at least you can buy better chips in Vienna. 😀

  4. diannaart

    “Most liveable” means diddly-squat to the homeless. Rents have done nothing except increase out of proportion to the majority of renters on stagnant wages or Centrelink benefits, public housing has reduced while populations have risen, developers are on first names with both sides of politics.

    The criteria for the award is not based on anything more than elitist aspirations.

    Although some credit must be given to Daniel Andrews for all the improvements made to the rail system. I dare say traffic will be less onerous now many railway crossings have been separated from road traffic – one small hurrah for that.

    Now, Michael, I have never been to Vienna, but I do know that just about any type of cuisine is available – fresh and delicious – in Melbourne and this would include really great chips – you just had a bad experience.

  5. Michael Taylor

    Dianna, if you want good chips you’ve got to go to Adelaide.

  6. Kaye Lee

    My son’s partner just made me the best chips I’ve ever eaten and I didn’t even have to get out of my jammies. And her heritage is Chinese. What a wonderful world we live in where we all learn from each other.

  7. Diannaart

    One of my favourite things about living in Australia is the food, Melbourne is great, so too are many other towns and cities. I am hoping to move to South Australia, sometime, somehow – in the southeast. Maybe a heads up on the chips, Michael?

    Kaye Lee, damn right, chips would be bog-standard greasy and boring without our mix of cultures.

    I love making my own chips, boiling whole spuds first, then slicing and baking in oven, topping with rosemary, sea salt and black pepper.

  8. Bronte ALLAN

    Melbourne traffic is horrendous, the number of toll roads/bridges is bad, the weather can be very bloody awful, even in one day! There are far too many homeless persons, the costs of housing are out of this world, & yet up until recently, it was the “world’s most livable city”, WTF?? The airport “freeway” is a traffic clogged joke, the outlying suburbs have no decent public transport, & the list goes on. I live in a suburb of Adelaide, & even this relatively “minor” city (on the world’s stage) is reasonably better than Melbourne!

  9. diannaart

    Bronte – I guess “liveable” means something different to the judges of this award.

    Melbourne is great if staying within the CBD with sufficient $ for taxis (or Uber) so as not to have to step over the homeless and then to enjoy the restaurants, live theatre, numerous festivals .

    Melbourne – liveable for the wealthy – like most big cities.

    Weather – actually, in Autumn Melbourne is very liveable indeed – my favourite time of year here.

    But too windy in Spring, too hot in summer and in winter it’s dreary as well as cold. Must admit, after living in Arizona, I enjoy watching seasonal change – variety is good for the soul. Always good for witty banter.

    I have to wonder why Sydney does not ever get this award – it’s a terrific place for the cashed up and superficial.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

The maximum upload file size: 2 MB. You can upload: image, audio, video, document, spreadsheet, interactive, text, archive, code, other. Links to YouTube, Facebook, Twitter and other services inserted in the comment text will be automatically embedded. Drop file here

Return to home page