National Public Transit Strategy

[jdobbin]

Maybe safer than Toronto's highways too.

http://ca.news.yahoo.com/s/capress/070305/...ransit_strategy

Canada's mayors say public transit needs millions of dollars just to keep operating and they're calling on Ottawa to create and fund a national strategy to prevent riders from being squeezed like sardines.

The Federation of Canadian Municipalities and big city mayors said Monday they need $2 billion annually from the federal government to maintain and expand public transit systems.

Should the federal government be involved?

I say yes. It isn't something that the private sector has taken the initiative on.

[mcqueen625]

Maybe safer than Toronto's highways too.

http://ca.news.yahoo.com/s/capress/070305/...ransit_strategy

Canada's mayors say public transit needs millions of dollars just to keep operating and they're calling on Ottawa to create and fund a national strategy to prevent riders from being squeezed like sardines.

The Federation of Canadian Municipalities and big city mayors said Monday they need $2 billion annually from the federal government to maintain and expand public transit systems.

Should the federal government be involved?

I say yes. It isn't something that the private sector has taken the initiative on.

In Saint John, NB the Irving's at one time owned Saint John Transit, but when they couldn't get the city to fund their profit margin they sold it off to the City who has been running it ever since. The reality is that public transit will never be self-sufficient and the cities, as well as the provincial, and federal governments realize that so it is up to the feds to step up to the plate, and help out if they hope to have an impact on the air pollution. The trick is to have the transit system running when the people need and want it otherwise the people will just continue to use their cars to get where they need to be.

In Saint John, we also just have Sunday shopping yet on most runs the public transit system runs only Monday to Friday, leaving all of those who have to work on weekends scrambling to get to work, mostly by private car. If the government is going to promote 7 day a week commerce, they also need to promote a 7 days per week transit system. When I spoke to one of the city councillors his excuse for not running the transit system the 6th or 7th day, was they could not afford to run it, but I have to ask, can they afford not to considering the fact that they promoted 7 days per week shopping at the request of the businesses. What they should have told big business is that in order to be open 7 days per week these business would have to contribute to the budget for the transit commission.

[Remiel]

Sounds good to me. We're too big a country to not have a comprehensive strategy for improving the transfer of people from point A to point B.

[B. Max]

I say yes. It isn't something that the private sector has taken the initiative on.

Because they know the human cattle liners are a loser.

[Canuck E Stan]

Sounds good to me. We're too big a country to not have a comprehensive strategy for improving the transfer of people from point A to point B.

National Public Transit Strategy?

That's easy. Free transit in every city across the country.

[B. Max]

National Public Transit Strategy?

That's easy. Free transit in every city across the country.

That would create a competition between free health care and free public transit to see which one can bankrupt us first.

[jdobbin]

National Public Transit Strategy?

That's easy. Free transit in every city across the country.

They help pay for roads, bridges and other infrastructure in the country. Why not public transit? Has to be better than a 75 car pile up every other day of the week.

[geoffrey]

I'll believe it when I see it. Public transit in Calgary means cramming yourself into a c-train car with smelly people sitting on top of you, if you ever get a seat. And the buses seats should be label with biohazard symbols.

It takes longer for me to transit then to drive... and my car's pretty fuel efficient so I pay probably an extra $100 to drive my ass to work and school. $100 is a small price to pay with how disgusting the transit is here. Think about it, it's like 3 or 4 hours of work... you'll miss alot more with whatever illness you catch on transit.

I wonder if anyone has studied that cost... perhaps transit isn't such an efficient idea.

[Saturn]

Should the federal government be involved?

Absolutely. Provincial governments aren't willing to pay the whole bill. In the meantime, cities are becoming more an more congested. In TO alone a million hours (of what could be productive time) are wasted by people sitting in traffic jams every single day. Enormous waste of time and enormous pollution from idling cars.

[Mad_Michael]

Maybe safer than Toronto's highways too.

http://ca.news.yahoo.com/s/capress/070305/...ransit_strategy

Canada's mayors say public transit needs millions of dollars just to keep operating and they're calling on Ottawa to create and fund a national strategy to prevent riders from being squeezed like sardines.

The Federation of Canadian Municipalities and big city mayors said Monday they need $2 billion annually from the federal government to maintain and expand public transit systems.

Should the federal government be involved?

I say yes. It isn't something that the private sector has taken the initiative on.

Mixed blessing.

Yes, the Federal government owes it to the cities to help fund public transit.

However, Federal government picking, choosing and paying for their own pet transit projects is not what anyone really needs. More photo-ops for Federal politicians is not a solution to anything.

Indeed, Toronto is supposedly about to get a new York subway line (supported by the Feds and Ontario) and of course, just like the last new line added, it is projected to be a huge cost and a huge loss, likely 20-30 years before break even point. For those of you paying attention, that means the Toronto taxpayers have to pay to cover the operating loss on these lines for decades to come. With 'gifts' like these, I'd rather have none.

Federal government will only join in on big ticket projects that get lots of publicity - even if those big projects are functionally useless. They seek publicity and votes, not improved transit policies.

For example, Toronto has made dozens of serious studies of our subway system. A majority of the studies all conclude that the Sheppard Line and the York U line are not profitable, do not have sufficient demand to apy for themselves and are really only just a huge subsidy to private developers. Needless to say, Ontario and the Feds have already built the Sheppard Line and are now announcing the York U line. Both are white elephants. Neither project pays even the slightest attention to actual Toronto transit needs.

Btw, just about every serious subway study in Toronto identifies the Keele-CNE-Pape feeder subway line as the one most in demand, the one that is most able to pay for itself with ridership, the one most able to relieve congestion. Needless to say, this line is still on the drawing table...

In other words, Federal money with Federal decisions for spending it is no real benefit to transit users in Toronto. Indeed, they just make the problems worse since we have to pay the operating subsidies on the no-demand lines THEY choose to build. They only build lines for empty subway cars where no one lives because that's where they get the most publicity (and the biggest developer kickbacks).

So unless the transit money is handed directly to the city to manage, we are better off without it. As it stands now, the Sheppard subway line (that no one uses, no one wanted) is already sucking the city's budget dry and will do so for some 30 years.

Like I said, this kind of gift we can do without.

[Mad_Michael]

Maybe safer than Toronto's highways too.

Btw, are you aware that the Hwy 401 through Toronto is the busiest highway on the planet?

One in LA comes second, one in Atlanta comes 3rd in number of vehicles per hour that use it.

[Keepitsimple]

I think you'll find that Harper and the Conservatives will respect the Constitution - the Provinces are responsible for the cities. Having said that, Ottawa is respnsible for many of the "levers" that affect our economy - mostly through the budgeting process (taxation) and the Bank of Canada. As such, there is recognition that large cities are the engines of the economy - so from that point of view, Ottawa has a vested interest in helping the cities to succeed. But.....if the only thing that Ottawa did was give money to the provinces, there would be no guarantee that the money would be properly spent. As a result, I think you'll find that the Conservatives will do a lot of "co-funding". I agree with the cities that there should be consistent funding for transit infrastructure. I see it working as follows:

1) Ottawa commits to a consistent block of funds that will be made available to the provinces every year - say $2 billion for example .

2) Funding is guaranteed for 10 years.

3) Projects are funded on a co-payment basis. As a rule, City projects would be paid one-third by the city, one-third by the province, and one-third by Ottawa.

This approach is very much in line with how the Conservatives are currently dealing with the Spadina subway expansion for Toronto. It respects the Provinces' juristiction and ensures that all parties have a vested interest.

[gc1765]

I'll believe it when I see it. Public transit in Calgary means cramming yourself into a c-train car with smelly people sitting on top of you, if you ever get a seat. And the buses seats should be label with biohazard symbols.

It takes longer for me to transit then to drive... and my car's pretty fuel efficient so I pay probably an extra $100 to drive my ass to work and school. $100 is a small price to pay with how disgusting the transit is here. Think about it, it's like 3 or 4 hours of work... you'll miss alot more with whatever illness you catch on transit.

I wonder if anyone has studied that cost... perhaps transit isn't such an efficient idea.

That's a pretty good argument for increasing funding for transit...especially for those who can not even afford to drive to work (not to mention that transit is better for the environment).

[Mad_Michael]

3) Projects are funded on a co-payment basis. As a rule, City projects would be paid one-third by the city, one-third by the province, and one-third by Ottawa.

This is the old formula that Ottawa and the Provinces just constantly renegged on.

Politicians are always there for the announcement of the project. They become scarce when it comes time to fulfill their promises with actual dollars.

Toronto has been actually funding 65-75% of the capital cost of the TTC for some twenty years now (under the formula you describe above). Promises aren't worth squat when the ones giving the promises reneg so often.

This approach is very much in line with how the Conservatives are currently dealing with the Spadina subway expansion for Toronto. It respects the Provinces' juristiction and ensures that all parties have a vested interest.

No. This Spadina example is EXACTLY the worst thing. It is not what Toronto wants or needs for optimal public transit service in Toronto. This subway extension doesn't even make top-ten of any seriously minded Toronto transit wishlist.

And this is precisely the problem with this kind of arrangement. The Feds only want big ticket projects that they can brag about - they don't care if the project is worthwhile, efficient or effective.

Spending billions on a useless subway that that is expected to achieve 10-15% usage during prime time is a massive waste of money. The amount of tax subsidy that this subway will suck up over the next 20-30 years makes the original investment look like small change! And the Feds won't be paying a penny of the running costs of their white elephants. Indeed, Toronto transit is already in serous trouble paying for the Sheppard line (it is projected for 15-20% prime time usage) which isn't ever going to be able to pay for its own operation.

Indeed, having some dude from Alberta, working in Ottawa, telling Toronto what subway line to build in Toronto is absurd and a recipe for the mess we've got.

[White Doors]

Indeed, having some dude from Alberta, working in Ottawa, telling Toronto what subway line to build in Toronto is absurd and a recipe for the mess we've got.

How's the medicine taste?

[Mad_Michael]

Indeed, having some dude from Alberta, working in Ottawa, telling Toronto what subway line to build in Toronto is absurd and a recipe for the mess we've got.

How's the medicine taste?

Huh? Do you have anything substantial to add to this discussion?

Toronto has a long history of Ottawa policies jammed down our throats. Nothing new here. Doesn't matter if the PM is from Alberta or Quebec.

[Keepitsimple]

3) Projects are funded on a co-payment basis. As a rule, City projects would be paid one-third by the city, one-third by the province, and one-third by Ottawa.

This is the old formula that Ottawa and the Provinces just constantly renegged on.

Politicians are always there for the announcement of the project. They become scarce when it comes time to fulfill their promises with actual dollars.

Toronto has been actually funding 65-75% of the capital cost of the TTC for some twenty years now (under the formula you describe above). Promises aren't worth squat when the ones giving the promises reneg so often.

This approach is very much in line with how the Conservatives are currently dealing with the Spadina subway expansion for Toronto. It respects the Provinces' juristiction and ensures that all parties have a vested interest.

No. This Spadina example is EXACTLY the worst thing. It is not what Toronto wants or needs for optimal public transit service in Toronto. This subway extension doesn't even make top-ten of any seriously minded Toronto transit wishlist.

And this is precisely the problem with this kind of arrangement. The Feds only want big ticket projects that they can brag about - they don't care if the project is worthwhile, efficient or effective.

Spending billions on a useless subway that that is expected to achieve 10-15% usage during prime time is a massive waste of money. The amount of tax subsidy that this subway will suck up over the next 20-30 years makes the original investment look like small change! And the Feds won't be paying a penny of the running costs of their white elephants. Indeed, Toronto transit is already in serous trouble paying for the Sheppard line (it is projected for 15-20% prime time usage) which isn't ever going to be able to pay for its own operation.

Indeed, having some dude from Alberta, working in Ottawa, telling Toronto what subway line to build in Toronto is absurd and a recipe for the mess we've got.

I think the Subway was a good example. The City and Province came up with the idea a long time ago and asked that Ottawa contribute. As I said, Ottawa has to respect the Province's juristiction and are not in the position to know what's best for every Province/City. In so doing, the Province and it's cities will decide where the money is best spent. That's what happened with Spadina. If you think the Province made a bad decision, you can always complain at the voting booth.

[Mad_Michael]

I think the Subway was a good example. The City and Province came up with the idea a long time ago and asked that Ottawa contribute. As I said, Ottawa has to respect the Province's juristiction and are not in the position to know what's best for every Province/City. In so doing, the Province and it's cities will decide where the money is best spent. That's what happened with Spadina. If you think the Province made a bad decision, you can always complain at the voting booth.

City didn't come up with that proposal. The city's own analysis recommended that the Keele/CNE/Pape line was the number one priority (from an actual transit perspective). Sheppard and YorkU/Spadina lines were discounted for being unlikely to ever be able to pay for their own operation (due to being built in the least dense area of the whole city - nothing but old cow-fields and suburban housing blocks up there - might as well build a subway system in Sudbury - likely to get the same amount of usage).

Btw, the same 'Provincial-Federal' transit initiative is also going to poor money into a useless 403 transit corridor in Missisauga that no one really wants either.

Interesting that the two projects that are tentatively green-lighted here are the two most expensive projects on the table. A dozen lesser expense, but higher need projects are ignored.

Bottom line is that Federal/Provincial politicians seem to be very vulnerable to the interests of private developers and cater their projects to suit the developers - actual transit need be damned.

And I'm going to be paying for operational subsidies for the Sheppard and YorkU/Spadina subway lines for the next 30 years. Wonderful - I have the opportunity to vote against both Ontario Liberals and Federal Conservatives to assuage my annoyance. Thank you. I feel honoured to have the privilege.

[geoffrey]

What does a monthly transit pass run oneself in Toronto?

[guyser]

What does a monthly transit pass run oneself in Toronto?

Adult = $99.75 (transferable) or $91.50 w/o

Children and students = $83.75 or $76.75

[geoffrey]

There you go, that's why Harper is doing it, trying to boost the numbers on his tax credit for bus passes.

For each adult, that's $185.00 in taxes back, an actually suprisingly large cut, about the same as a 1% cut in the lowest bracket.

So there you go naysayers, this is your first carbon tax, from Harper. Raise income taxes and give back to those that don't pollute.

Me though, I'll chose to keep on polluting instead of getting sick from some foreigner coughing up on me on the C-Train. Not enough cash in it for me yet, $200 bucks? I'll drive.

[Canuck E Stan]

Me though, I'll chose to keep on polluting instead of getting sick from some foreigner coughing up on me on the C-Train. Not enough cash in it for me yet, $200 bucks? I'll drive.

And Parking is free?

[guyser]

...of getting sick from some foreigner coughing up on me on the C-Train.

Nice attitude .

[August1991]

Should the federal government be involved?

I say yes. It isn't something that the private sector has taken the initiative on.

Trudeau set up a federal Department of Urban Affairs.

I recall a friend once stating that the big error in Quebec was not making Montreal the capital. And the big error in Canada was not making Toronto the capital.

Some people in English Canada may feel that it is good if the federal government decides how to spend money for urban infrastructure. Most people in Quebec would say that the money should just go to the Quebec government to be spent as it sees fit - no strings attached.

In Quebec, when the federal government spends money, we often wind up with boondoggles.

[jdobbin]

Trudeau set up a federal Department of Urban Affairs.

I recall a friend once stating that the big error in Quebec was not making Montreal the capital. And the big error in Canada was not making Toronto the capital.

Some people in English Canada may feel that it is good if the federal government decides how to spend money for urban infrastructure. Most people in Quebec would say that the money should just go to the Quebec government to be spent as it sees fit - no strings attached.

In Quebec, when the federal government spends money, we often wind up with boondoggles.

Trudeau transfered control of CMHC to the the Urban Affair ministry. For a time, he was hoping to elevate the municipalities into a new "tripartitism." The provinces had no desire to see this happen. Eventually the ministry failed although the federal government still provided money to cities in a variety of ways with provincial participation.

I understand that you are against federal spending in principle. You can vote against Harper next election if you believe this completely. The amount of announcements that Harper has been making the last weeks has been quite breathtaking.

I happen to believe the public transit and power grid announcement was good policy.