If Jay Weatherill had a conversion to the need for a state transport plan, it must have been the full Road to Damascus experience with shining lights, booming voices and a conscience-piercing moment of truth.

Earlier this year, Weatherill and his ministers were so unenthusiastic about the need for a transport plan that they refused to even say the phrase.

As InDaily reported in January, Weatherill explicitly rejected the need for a documented transport strategy.

“I think you’ve seen a transport strategy outlined by Minister Conlon through his tenure as Transport Minister,” he said.

When it was put to him that the RA A wanted such a document, Weatherill replied: “Well, some people are harder to please than others.”

Patrick Conlon, a very long-standing transport minister, refused to produce a transport plan and his successor Tom Koutsantonis told InDaily that he agreed with Conlon.

In March 2013, InDaily was one of the few news outlets to report that the Federal Government had – very quietly – provided $2 million to SA to “help it align the transport and urban development of the future”.

We sniffed a transport plan in the offing. But, even then, Koutsantonis’s office denied the money would be spent on a transport plan. The specific answer to our question about whether a transport plan would result was: “No.”

Yesterday, Weatherill purged his skepticism to the tune of $36 billion over 30 years.

Interestingly, he claimed he had always supported a transport plan which is integrated with land use planning. His spruiking of the plan yesterday was enthusiastic and full of messages that we’ll hear a lot of in the lead-up to the election.

[As an ironic aside, Holden has played an unlikely role here in a plan which includes billions of dollars of investment in public transport. Adelaide’s love for cars – particularly the home-grown Holden – was the key reason why we ripped up our extensive tram network in the mid-20th century. The continuing loss of manufacturing jobs, and the need to make our city attractive to the best and brightest, was raised by Weatherill yesterday as a key reason why such a bold transport plan is needed.]

The turnaround has something to do with politics. Weatherill desperately needed a political “big bang” – and yesterday’s plan certainly provided that.

But it also was a genuine victory for sensible voices in Government and in the bureaucracy who have always seen the need for a transport plan that provides a very long-term strategy for the city and the state.

Without such a transport vision, the 30-year Plan for Greater Adelaide has been a sitting duck for critics.

The impending rezoning of the inner city to accommodate an estimated 30,000 extra people would have no hope of gaining popular support without an accompanying plan to stop excess traffic making the suburbs unbearable.

All in all, this plan is something that Weatherill can use as an unlikely election rallying point for his tired troops.

On the other hand, the Liberals have done well to flush this out, five months ahead of the election.

They support a transport plan, and now have time to flesh out their own priorities and approach.