Competition

[Yoshimura]

So the TTC has a monopoly. Enforced by coercive funding methods... ethical issues aside, how about at least allowing for competition?

I had this idea after visiting Malta:

There are approximately 500 buses in public transit service in Malta, most of them privately owned by the bus drivers themselves, and operated to a unified timetable set by the transport authority. Malta buses carry approximately 31 million passengers per year.[3] On any one day, half the bus fleet works on the public transport network (called 'route buses'), while the other half are used for private tours and school transportation.

Wikipedia


Booooya! The fare in Malta is cheap too, which is better for people with low income. This system is sexy
Have the TTC at least compete alongside private bus drivers.


so 2 questions:
1) What do YOU think of the Maltese proposition?

2) Is this possible at all for Toronto? Or are the established political forces too strong?

 

[afransen]

I like the idea of outsourcing operators. Have several companies take on operating various routes, and competitive bidding every few years. Also, we could then enforce customer service standards.

 

[Second_in_pie]

^^ Haha, you're making it sound like we can't enforce customer service standards as it is!

I'm kinda confused how it works in Malta. Is it basically that they're private bus companies, but under a unified system? Do they get a government subsidy or something? I can't imagine that dirt cheap busses along routes the government says need to get coverage will make you a lot of money.

 

[Justin10000]

How about making a comparison between cities?

The fact you are comparing a country that runs 500 buses with a yearly ridership of 31 to a CITY that runs over 1500 buss with a yearly ridership of over 418 million tells me you only just preaching some sort of ideology.

Privatization is not the answer for Toronto. It simply cannot work, when you need to serve a city this size.

 

[kEiThZ]

How about making a comparison between cities?

The fact you are comparing a country that runs 500 buses with a yearly ridership of 31 to a CITY that runs over 1500 buss with a yearly ridership of over 418 million tells me you only just preaching some sort of ideology.

Privatization is not the answer for Toronto. It simply cannot work, when you need to serve a city this size.

Not to nitpick, but sweeping generalizations rarely ever hold true. Many places all over the world have private operators with various operating environments, ranging from a fully private service, to some kind of jitney service to private operators working within a public service delivery framework. If London can manage private bus operators, why can't Toronto? Last I checked, London's a lot bigger than Toronto.

I am not sayin that it's the only way to do it. But why write off the idea completely?

 

[andomano]

How about making a comparison between cities?

Malta is a very tiny country, being 312 km^2, and it's split by two 2 main islands. Toronto has an area of 610 km^2. Malta's essentialy 1/2 the size of TO... it's not like he's comparing all of Russia to Toronto.

 

[waterloowarrior]

TTC should emulate the model used in Scandinavian countries and London... TTC does planning, private companies bid on routes. Some places do best level of service for specified price, others do lowest prices for specified level of service, some do combination. TTC bus company can still exist or be disbanded.

 

[Tulse]

So who would run the less-profitable routes that are currently subsidized by the more profitable ones? Would the private operators receive any money from the city or province, or would they be expected to operate without any public cash? Could they actually make any money doing so?

 

[Junction416]

Toronto is simply not dense enough outside the core for any company to make money off of transit. If you can find anyone crazy enough to think they can make money off a bus line in Toronto I would like to hear it. And if you do you'll end up giving away all your money making lines and being left with a rump of a public system that relies even more on public subsidies. Unfortunately in North America we have to subsides transit to make it work effectively in all parts of the City. Toronto is not London, which had a population of well over 1,000,000 people before the automobile era and hence has the densities to support private bus companies. The people who need good transit the most will be hurt the most, the elderly and young living at the edges of the City, by privatization. They would see level of services lowered, higher fares to cover the costs of servicing low density areas and all this would hurt the broader system which would see fewer people overall making transit trips and using the subway. This is not the kind of city I want to live in.

Privatization is not a solution for transit in Toronto. You might spend a little less tax money but over the long run you'll pay for it with increased congestions on our roads and highways, the further isolation of disadvantaged suburban neighbourhoods and a transit system more interested in a profit then ensuring every person has a way to get around.

 

[DavidH]

Toronto is simply not dense enough outside the core for any company to make money off of transit. If you can find anyone crazy enough to think they can make money off a bus line in Toronto I would like to hear it.

And yet the various companies that contract to operate YRT's operations - ALL of them - manage to do it. So does Trentway-Wagar, which operates DRT's Whitby operations.

 

[leopetr]

And yet the various companies that contract to operate YRT's operations - ALL of them - manage to do it. So does Trentway-Wagar, which operates DRT's Whitby operations.

Well, yes. They don't get the farebox revenue. They just get paid by the government to operate buses according to a certain schedule. It's more of an outsourcing than a privatization.

 

[waterloowarrior]

Toronto is simply not dense enough outside the core for any company to make money off of transit. If you can find anyone crazy enough to think they can make money off a bus line in Toronto I would like to hear it. And if you do you'll end up giving away all your money making lines and being left with a rump of a public system that relies even more on public subsidies. Unfortunately in North America we have to subsides transit to make it work effectively in all parts of the City. Toronto is not London, which had a population of well over 1,000,000 people before the automobile era and hence has the densities to support private bus companies. The people who need good transit the most will be hurt the most, the elderly and young living at the edges of the City, by privatization. They would see level of services lowered, higher fares to cover the costs of servicing low density areas and all this would hurt the broader system which would see fewer people overall making transit trips and using the subway. This is not the kind of city I want to live in.

That's not how London's system works. London Buses and other agencies set out the routes, fares, types of vehicles and performance standards. Operators provide a schedule that delivers the level of service specified and their total cost + profit margin for providing the service. Route contracts are for 5-7 years based on gross cost for mileage and reliability along with incentives for service quality. Tender evaluation is based on best value for money, taking into account quality and safety as essential features.

http://www.tfl.gov.uk/tfl/businessa...lts/lbsl-tendering-and-contracting-feb-09.pdf

In both London and Scandinavian cities this has lead to significant cost savings and increased service levels.

 

[afransen]

And outsourcing is a great idea.

 

[Junction416]

I was responding to comments about privatization. Private-Public Partnerships are different but I still remain skeptical that private companies can provide better and cheaper service and that governments and tax payers are getting a fair deal from these agreements. That the public is required to take on most of the risk while private companies are able to take advantage of most of the potential benefits is far from ideal.

Regardless, there is no such thing as free transit. We will be paying for it through taxes or through fares rapid transit, like roads, will always involve billions of dollars to build and maintain as well as extensive government involvement and management. Outsourcing may reduce some costs over time but its not a panacea. We still need long term funding commitments from federal and provincial governments no matter how much competition we introduce.

 

[scarberiankhatru]

So who would run the less-profitable routes that are currently subsidized by the more profitable ones?

None of the TTC's surface routes are profitable...it's not like a route that only recoups 30% of its costs is "subsidized" in any tangible way by another route that manages to recoup 50%. Even if the TTC's accounting is muddled and a route like the Coxwell or Main bus actually does eke out a tiny operational profit, it does absolutely nothing to support a far more expensive route like Steeles or Queen.