Only a short time ago, we had McGuinty telling us that the cost of doing nothing is higher than the cost of building this transit. Is that no longer true? Has GTA population stopped growing?
He was the one who had to delay any discussion of investment strategy to 2013.
We are still building transit, so I don't see how the comparitive cost of doing nothing fits in. The question needing to be asked is: "does the cost of not doing the full original TC outweigh the cost of doing the new reduced TC?" Am I disappointed, somewhat. Am I disappointed that McGuinty continued to persue transit funding after other factors restricted his ability to freely fund transit? No.
To make any investment strategy before 2013 is stupidity. The provincial-federal Health and Social Transfer pacts expire in 2013 (2014 with the extention), so the deficit, debt, and tax structure at that time is open for debate. 2010 and 2011 will be about "holding course" and "weathering the storm".
The issue to me is scale - at a fundamental level Metrolinx is beholden to the province, which frankly is not the level at which regional transit policies, much less the even more salient issues of funding and the methods by which to obtain them, should draw from. Transit is far too much of an urban (read Toronto) issue to compete with more provincially scaled ones like health and education for attention and funding. No one will cut those two given the relative importance of that to all Ontarians.
Besides, just how much provincial public money is spent on highway constructure outside the 416? Perhaps they should remind themselves of that first before whining about Toronto.
The GTA has gone through several variations of the level of control. GO (Government of Ontario) Transit was started as crown corportation for 30 years then download to the Toronto Area Transportation Operating Authority to become the Greater Toronto Services Board then back to the province as the Greater Toronto Transit Authority. There are too much diversity of local politics in the GTHA to make local funding decisions without bias. As much as I hate seeing Metrolinx struggle for funding beside MTO, Health, and Social Assistance, I hated seeing the GTSB neglect significant capital investments instead.
One question I have is why the city isn't stepping up to the plate and paying for the truncated bits on Finch and Sheppard. If LRT is so apparently cheap, surely the city can fund the rest by itself.
Because the City, the Provience, and the Feds are all credit junkies that are barely managing to pay the bills. However, if Miller wanted to leave a real legacy, he'd raise a tax for transit capital funding, cover the funding deficit, and stop whining that he didn't get everything on his wish list.
Canada seems reluctant to really acknowledge its urban centres unless the Olympics are going on or whatever. The economic and social importance of transit in Toronto as compared to every other place in Ontario was best demonstrated by the OC Transpo strike. It lasted 51 days. Ottawa has not reached the tipping point where transit becomes an integral part of the city's day-to-day economy.
If Toronto struggles economically over the next decade it will be in large part due to the lack of investment in transit infrastructure.
That's why this move is so disastrous and why I won't vote for this provincial Liberal party again unless they change gears.
Canada is a divided nation between very urban and very rural. Austrilia are one of the
I like your issue motivated voting, but I would ask that you check the stance of the NDP/CPO/GPO on transit funding before voting against the Liberals on the issue.
The city has made an offer to finance the costs themselves so the construction schedule can continue as originally planned. The province has declined. I think a big issue at the moment is that these were to be provincially-owned transit lines.
What went wrong is that people who should be acting like allies (transit advocates and users) are too divided to stand up to the province with one unified voice. Instead of demanding funding, we argue ad nauseum about technology choice, we allow ourselves to get divided into 416 and 905, TTC users and GO users, etc. The limited funding historically available for transit projects has turned us into cannibals preying on our own kind. Witness the amount of people filled with glee now that TC is threatened, the ones who fool themselves into thinking that somehow Rob Ford will scrape together enough money to build subways everywhere, or for that matter the amount of people who cheerfully point out the Sheppard subway's perceived failure.
No one wins when money for transit suddenly dries up, and it would be helpful if we could all put this LRT vs. subways thing aside right now and stand up together for an investment in transit. It's all too easy for politicians to cancel funding when half of the people who would be advocating for transit are cheering on the cuts hoping that their pet project might have a chance now, not realizing that a lack of funds means nothing is going to get built at all.
Obviously this isn't the only thing that went wrong, but I'm sure I'm not the only one who's starting to get really irritated with every thread in T&I turning into an LRT vs. subway argument (with the same people making the same points over and over again). When transit funding gets cut, we to put these relatively minor differences to the side and work together.
Hear! Hear!
Keithz:
If a tax hike of what, 40M per year resulted in the howls of protests, why would one think it would be politically opportune to use this method to raise funding locally for transit? Personally I think that's a preferred route, unfortunately I believe this view is in the minority.
AoD
So you assume "the average man" is an idiot and anyone on the Metrolinx board won't be?
Then you say Metrolinx wasn't serious about fulfilling their mandate.
MO2020 was not Metrolinx's idea. They came up with "The Big Move", remember?
Actually, there was a time the board took their mandate seriously. There was going to be a robust discussion on tolls, taxes, private partnerships and other payment options. The Metrolinx board, composed of those pesky elected officials, was fired shortly after. The new appointed board is fulfilling their new mandate nicely though, not being a chequebook for municipal politicians, just being a chequebook for provincial politicians. Of course we don't really know what cheques they will deliver because as we are idiots, so we're not allowed to know what's going on or have any input.
Half the population is below average intellegence. Public consultation takes time and money. A lack of transparency is endemic in Canada, and there is probably some avoidance of public anger (a la Weston sub), but on the timescale they've rejigged their overriding capital program, public consultation isn't feasible. Beyond that, what would it reveal about the projects besides a popularity contest?
The original Metrolinx board were municipal politicians, so would the board spot be tied to the office and the board become disfunctional as local politics changed, or would the spots be tied to the individual and thereby be exactly what the current board is: a political appointment. Every system has flaws, we've got to live with what we have and hopefully improve upon it. But let's make sure those changes are in the right direction. I would prefer an at least partially directly elected board.
Going back....................I did a typo. I meant to write $310 MILLION/ km not 3.1 billion. As I said any line that comes in at more than $200 million per km in the burbs is calmed palm greaing. Yes other cities are spending per km more like the Second Ave in NYC but that is downtown in a huge older city while Spadina is going thru a suburban wasteland.
Several reasons why TC failed. First therer were too many lines. When there are several lines it's easier to just cancel a few independently. Second, it takes Toronto years just to get things off the ground. When a line's funding is announced then shovels should be in the ground withing 6 months tops. Vancouver built it's 18km MLine in just 22 months from the announcement to opening day. Vancouver's light metro Canada Line started construction withing 3 months of announcement. Third build the entire line at once, the entire stretch and when roads are dug up for 37 km like Eglinton Pearson to Kingston there is no way of stopping it. Fourth. Bring in affordable costs and keep to them. When TC was announced the price was $6 billion and when the province announced a massive contribution by paying Toronto's portion all of the sudden the price skyrockets by 50%. That's not bad math but pure manipulation.
The Construction Price Index for Toronto from 2005 to 2010 is 25.1%. If they quoted prices as in base year dollars with an inflation index (around 5% a year), it'd make people realise that to do something for $200m in 2005 would now cost $250m in 2010.
