Debate on the merits of the Scarborough Subway Extension

[Hopkins123]

Although Scarborough subway advocates are acting tough on here the Glen Murray alignment (common sense alignment) made zero political sense despite being the cheapest subway option. They would have had to buy a bunch of houses near Kennedy station to turn the subway train. I remember when this was suggested a bunch of the owners were like not over my dead body. Also once people realized that they had to take a bus for 3 years while construction was being built that become political suicide as well. Finally the idea of an above ground subway stop (think minus 30 weather) was considered disrespectful to scarborough riders when this was considered. Now that this subway has turned into a 1 stop 5 billion dollar ride there is a lot of revisionist history here. By the way elevated also was never a option because guess what... respect for scarborough riders downtown elites.

I never changed my tune. If the direct connection to Scarborough General Hospital is lost, the McCowan alignment loses some appeal. And who said the entire route would have to be above ground? Presumably the line would veer underground prior to Ellesmere, where a new station at Ellesmere/Midland could be constructed then in the same ROW as the SRT but underground heads to the Town Centre, only right underneath the existing bus terminal. No need for a new $400 million bus terminal. Beyond there it could resurface east of McCowan onward to Centennial and Malvern. It's not rocket science. And just because one government ruled it out, doesn't mean every successive administration has to be beholden to their decision.

 

[BurlOak]

Fords compromise lasted for all of about ten minutes before it was rejected. There wasn't enough time to get to the outdoor stations inevitable complaints (they definitely existed online by at least the infamous coffey1, too bad we don't know who that is) once they realized that scarborough riders would lose their minds if they had to bus for 3 years to get from stc to Kennedy while this gets built. But hey the reasonable OneCity liked your comment so it must be right.

The Ford plan was around for 9 months. No complaints about stations or elevation. The only complaint was about cost.
Elevation was briefly discussed, and again, not a negative work from Ford. In the article about elevation, the quote from Fords press secretary."There is also a good opportunity here for there to be other options presented and we look forward to hearing what those are.”
The thing that didn't even make the discussions was a combination of the 2006 plan to upgrade the line to Mark II, which would reduce the closure of the SRT to 8 months, and the extension of this technology to the Eglinton portion. There were options open back in the day, but it seems a naive Ford assumed that Stintz and Metrolinx were working to find a workable plan, when in reality they were working in tandem to sabotage the whole thing.

 

[Rainforest]

In addition to what @BurlOak mentioned with Glen Murray tabling this plan only to have council immediately reject, Tory also had this alignment reviewed (link here) at the start of his Mayoralty and the cost came back a shade under $3B. It was rejected with the negligible cost differential, extensive shutdown of the current RT and moving to McCowan alignment would also clear the path for RER/Smarttack.

The McCowan alignment was best indeed, based on the cost estimates available at the time.

Even without the benefits of Smarttrack the McCowan alignment provides greater long term benefit if stops are added, but I agree there the BDL extension would have been more cost effective and still provided improved benefit to the Centre using sections of the old corridor, similar to connecting the Eglinton LRT seamless to SCC

It is unfortunate that the planners did not revisit the choice of alignment once the cost of McCowan option escalated so much. Elements of the escalation are directly related to the tunnel design, and likely would not apply to the surface route.

Anyway we need SSE built, but I am not sure which option is best now. Proceed with the tunnel and one-stop plan, to avoid any further delays? Proceed with the tunnel but add Lawrence East station? Or, study the Uxbridge Corridor option again, and see if it can save enough to justify the change in course?

I wish the new provincial government moves quickly, doesn't keep this project in limbo for several more years.

 

[Bureaucromancer]

At this point I'd think the only realistic options are to proceed as is or add Lawrence station. Evening roughing it in would have all the delays and much of the cost of revising the design at this stage with none of the short term benefit.

Frankly the one stop plan's biggest problem has been the utter inability to discuss it in a meaningful way. There's never been a chance to look at Lawrence East in terms of it's value now the costs have escalated, having been preemptively scoped out of all the studies and with all council discussion being killed with screaming from both sides about the merits of the project as a whole.

 

[steveintoronto]

Frankly the one stop plan's biggest problem has been the utter inability to discuss it in a meaningful way, there's never been a chance to look at Lawrence East in terms of it's value now the costs have escalated, having been preemptively scoped out of all the studies and with all council discussion being killed with screaming from both sides about the merits of the project as a whole.

The answer to that was always exceedingly simple: An independent audit, which Council has always nixed.

Let's hope Ford et al have included the SSE in the "Line by line audit" they now claim to be hanging their ruffled hat on.

 

[pstogios]

Let's hope Ford et al have included the SSE in the "Line by line audit" they now claim to be hanging their ruffled hat on.

That’s a funny joke!

 

[steveintoronto]

That’s a funny joke!

Just remember that one when they 'accidently' overlook the SSE...they're tying a noose around their own necks on this one. Note also that many reputable agencies walked away from the RFQ, stating that (gist) "it's an impossible task in the time allotted, for *any* amount of money". But note also that winner is duty bound to release it all to the public. I'll double check the details on that, and correct later if need be.

I'm *looking forward* to this.

Addendum: Grab your popcorn!

Below is a summary of how the inquiry and audit will work:

What will the Independent Financial Commission of Inquiry do?

• The inquiry will look back at Ontario's public finances and government accounting practices in order to have a clear idea of where taxpayers' money is being spent and inform the 2017-18 Public Accounts
• The inquiry will operate with complete independence from the Government of Ontario, and is established under the Public Inquiries Act, 2009
• It will provide advice and recommendations on the Province's current fiscal reality and budgetary position for the current fiscal year (2018-19) and beyond
• The deadline for the inquiry's final report will be August 30
• The inquiry will be provided with a dedicated budget and staff resources necessary to meet this deadline
• [...]
• What is the external line-by-line audit of government spending?
• • This is a comprehensive audit of past government spending across major sectors and government programs, and will focus on three primary tasks:
    • Conducting a detailed analysis of government spending over the past 15 years
    • Comparing Ontario government expenditures and the rate of spending growth against that of other major provinces
    • Finding ways to save money and improve services, programs and sectors that may need more focused review
  • This audit will include a review of spending across the broader public sector
  • It will also include opportunities for public input and consultation
  • The results of the line-by-line review will be used to make government more efficient and effective, and make sure that all government spending is delivering promised results for the people of Ontario
  Who will lead the external line-by-line audit of government spending?
  
  
  • On July 17, the province issued a public request for bids to competitively acquire consulting services for a line-by-line review of all government programs and services
  • The request for bids will be posted for 15 days at ontariotenders.bravosolution.com under tender 9519
  • Interested parties will need to register with BravoSolution. Once registered, the request for bids can then be accessed and downloaded for review. There are no costs to register or to download procurement documents of interest
  • Instructions on how the bidding process will work and the forms that need to be filled out to submit a bid are included in the request for bids
  • The deadline for submissions is August 1, 2018

• https://news.ontario.ca/opo/en/2018...ine-by-line-audit-of-government-spending.html
  
• 
  
• OK ffing software. stop indenting now you've made this a freakin't mess again.
  

 

[sixrings]

Independent audit by a downtown bike riding, starbucks drinking, pinko "elite"

 

[steveintoronto]

And to top things off, in Googling since I left this string to join this one: https://urbantoronto.ca/forum/threa...cluding-extensions.4952/page-840#post-1370147 with more research, by making the auit "independent"...it puts it 'off the A-G books' and unable to be accessed by FOI...

Any thoughts you wish to add would be appreciated there, albeit it is a related aside to the topic, the aside being "DBFOM" but it relates very much to this string too. In fact, it would be worth its own string, the subject is about to go critical.

 

[Rainforest]

Let's hope Ford et al have included the SSE in the "Line by line audit" they now claim to be hanging their ruffled hat on.

Independent audit is nice, but the question always comes: Who sets the criteria?

In other words, who decides the monetary value of the faster and more convenient travel.

 

[pstogios]

Who sets the criteria?

In other words, who decides the monetary value of the faster and more convenient travel.

Common sense sets the criteria.

A subway to Pickering would be faster and more convenient travel compared to other public transit options, but we all know how stupid that idea would be.

 

[Rainforest]

Common sense sets the criteria.

In case of highly polarizing issues like SSE, groups on both sides of the divide are confident that "their" common sense is the right common sense.

A subway to Pickering would be faster and more convenient travel compared to other public transit options, but we all know how stupid that idea would be.

Indeed it would be hard to find many supporters of a subway to Pickering, but that just means the whole example is an outlier.

 

[steveintoronto]

Independent audit is nice, but the question always comes: Who sets the criteria?

Other points aside, this is the nub of the question. And not only 'who sets them'...but *how*?

I keep Googling on the "Independent Audit"...which the more I read about it, isn't independent at all. It's a *primed device* to give answers to the pre-arranged questions. (These are all Con hacks, btw, albeit some with credentials. Rosen a direct operative in Ford's election)

[...]

What will the Independent Financial Commission of Inquiry do?

• The inquiry will look back at Ontario's public finances and government accounting practices in order to have a clear idea of where taxpayers' money is being spent and inform the 2017-18 Public Accounts
  
  
• The inquiry will operate with complete independence from the Government of Ontario, and is established under the Public Inquiries Act, 2009
  
  
• It will provide advice and recommendations on the Province's current fiscal reality and budgetary position for the current fiscal year (2018-19) and beyond
  
  
• The deadline for the inquiry's final report will be August 30
  
  
• The inquiry will be provided with a dedicated budget and staff resources necessary to meet this deadline

Who will lead the Independent Financial Commission of Inquiry?

Gordon Campbell - Chair

Gordon Campbell served as the High Commissioner for Canada to the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland from 2011 to 2016. Previously, he served as Premier of British Columbia from 2001 to 2011, and as Mayor of Vancouver from 1986 to 1993.

As Premier of British Columbia, Campbell focused on creating jobs and cutting taxes, reducing regulation, increasing competitiveness, and investing in postsecondary education. Campbell was also instrumental in opening Canada's Northern Gateway.

Dr. Al Rosen - Commissioner

Al Rosen is a prominent forensic accountant and the founder of Rosen & Associates Limited, one of Canada's leading independent litigation and investigative accounting firms. His firm's specialties include auditors' negligence, business valuations, damage quantification, shareholder disputes, financial and equity analysis, and due diligence.

Rosen led the litigation accounting and business valuation division of a mid-sized accounting firm before founding his own company. He has also been an instructor and professor of accounting at the University of British Columbia, York University, University of Alberta and University of Washington. He has served in several roles at these universities, including as Area Coordinator and Director of the MBA program.

Rosen has an MBA and PhD. He is also a Fellow of the Chartered Accountants of Ontario and Alberta (FCA), a Fellow of the Society of Management Accountants (FSMA), a Fellow of the Hong Kong Society of Accountants (FHKSA), a Certified Fraud Examiner (CFE), a Chartered Insurance Professional (CIP), a Certified Public Accountant (CPA), and a specialist, Investigative and Forensic Accounting (CA-IFA).

Michael Horgan - Commissioner

Michael Horgan has over 36 years of experience in the public sector, and currently provides clients with strategic advice on the financial sector and on the Canadian and international economies. Horgan also has expertise on Aboriginal, energy and environmental issues.

Prior to joining Bennett Jones, where he currently acts as a senior advisor, Horgan held high-level positions in the Government of Canada and for the International Monetary Fund.

What is the external line-by-line audit of government spending?

• This is a comprehensive audit of past government spending across major sectors and government programs, and will focus on three primary tasks:
  • Conducting a detailed analysis of government spending over the past 15 years
    
    
  • Comparing Ontario government expenditures and the rate of spending growth against that of other major provinces
    
    
  • Finding ways to save money and improve services, programs and sectors that may need more focused review
• This audit will include a review of spending across the broader public sector
  
  
• It will also include opportunities for public input and consultation
  
  
• The results of the line-by-line review will be used to make government more efficient and effective, and make sure that all government spending is delivering promised results for the people of Ontario

Who will lead the external line-by-line audit of government spending?

• On July 17, the province issued a public request for bids to competitively acquire consulting services for a line-by-line review of all government programs and services
  
  
• The request for bids will be posted for 15 days at ontariotenders.bravosolution.com under tender 9519
  
  
• Interested parties will need to register with BravoSolution. Once registered, the request for bids can then be accessed and downloaded for review. There are no costs to register or to download procurement documents of interest
  
  
• Instructions on how the bidding process will work and the forms that need to be filled out to submit a bid are included in the request for bids
  
  
• The deadline for submissions is August 1, 2018

https://news.ontario.ca/opo/en/2018...ine-by-line-audit-of-government-spending.html

From the Globe:

Doug Ford’s fiscal crackdown begins with a glaring waste of taxpayers' money

DAVID PARKINSON
PUBLISHED JULY 18, 2018UPDATED JULY 20, 2018
FOR SUBSCRIBERS

It’s ironic that a premier elected on a pledge of leaner, more cost-effective government would kick off that quest with such a glaring waste of time and money.

Ontario Premier Doug Ford this week unveiled an Independent Financial Commission of Inquiry to investigate the province’s public finances and accounting practices under the previous government. He also announced that his government will soon hire an external auditor to conduct a “line-by-line audit” of that government’s spending.

The entire exercise will take about two months, and the government expects it will cost about $1-million. The three commissioners will each get $50,000 for less than six weeks’ work.


Doug Ford Year One: What’s happened so far in the new Ontario

Thing is, the Ontario government already has access to an independent audit of its finances – from its Auditor-General, Bonnie Lysyk, who was paid more than $300,000 last year by the province. Ms. Lysyk has already issued a professional opinion that the previous government’s budget has not properly accounted for a couple of key items: surpluses in public-sector pension plans and the treatment of debts the government incurred to reduce electricity rates last year. The result, Ms. Lysyk has argued, is that the spring budget understated this year’s deficit by $5-billion.


Ontario also already has an independent watchdog charged with putting its budgets, the costs and benefits of its programs and its economic assumptions under a microscope. That would be the Financial Accountability Office of Ontario. It is a non-partisan body (its head is appointed by a consensus of all parties in the legislature) that was established five years ago to handle just the sort of thing Mr. Ford’s commission of inquiry is being asked to do. The FAO has warned about “structural deficits” that are higher than the previous government’s projections; it said in its spring report that these deficits “cannot be eliminated by economic growth alone, but would instead require fiscal policy changes to raise revenue or reduce spending.”

But apparently Mr. Ford feels we need a new body, one hand-picked by his new government, to investigate things that have already been investigated.

Frankly, no one would blame Ms. Lysyk and the province’s Financial Accountability Officer, Peter Weltman, if they handed Mr. Ford their letters of resignation. If you want to undermine confidence in their offices, hiring someone to replicate their work is a pretty good way to do it.

What’s more, it appears Mr. Ford already knows what the inquiry will find. “Under the Liberals, the books were cooked. The deficit numbers were faked,” he declared (not for the first time) at the news conference Tuesday announcing the inquiry and audit.

It’s hard not to feel like this is less a serious investigation than a smokescreen. [...]

https://www.theglobeandmail.com/bus...own-begins-with-a-glaring-waste-of-taxpayers/

 

[syn]

Common sense sets the criteria.

A subway to Pickering would be faster and more convenient travel compared to other public transit options, but we all know how stupid that idea would be.

I don't think it would be faster and more convenient at all.

Subways are great in dense urban environments, but I'd much rather take a GO Train from Pickering.

A 1.5 - 2 hour subway ride doesn't sound terribly appealing.

 

[W. K. Lis]

Common sense sets the criteria.

A subway to Pickering would be faster and more convenient travel compared to other public transit options, but we all know how stupid that idea would be.

Faster? Actually, the GO Train/RER/SmartTrack would be faster.