Toronto Ontario Line 3 | ?m | ?s

[AlvinofDiaspar]

Maybe expectations could be better managed if instead of announcing a specific completion date, such as 2031, they would give a window instead, such as 2031-2033 or something like that.

That's still kind of loose - and not at all confidence inspiring. No one else gets a 2 year contingency padding. It's a funded subway line that has already been tendered - not one that is still in the drawing board.

The public is paying $11B+ for this project - there should be a reasonable date communicated to the public, not a "it will happen when it happen" response. The lack of a firm date also short-circuit the ability of the public to hold a party accountable - it becomes a carte blanche for anything from legitimate, unavoidable challenges to poor performance.

And of course, the latter is exactly the point. Avoidance of accountability.

AoD

 

[innsertnamehere]

Maybe expectations could be better managed if instead of announcing a specific completion date, such as 2031, they would give a window instead, such as 2031-2033 or something like that.

I agree that this is the simple solution.

The problem is that it not only burns metrolinx, but the politicians too. So the political directive is to avoid it.

It's the same reason everything moved to PPPs - not because it's actually cheaper, but because it shifts blame for cost overruns from politicians to the contractors. Instead of paying for cost overruns up front, they simply pay an inflated price on every contract so that the contractor can afford to cover any overrun. Easy, problem solved!

It's all a story of broken and inefficient project management due to political pressures coming from high pressure journalistic analysis and criticism of highly complex construction programs by journalists who really aren't qualified to create fair, informed reports on the issues.

 

[innsertnamehere]

That's still kind of loose - and not at all confidence inspiring. No one else gets a 2 year contingency padding. It's a funded subway line that has already been tendered - not one that is still in the drawing board.

The public is paying $11B+ for this project - there should be a reasonable date communicated to the public, not a "it will happen when it happen" response. The lack of a firm date also short-circuit the ability of the public to hold a party accountable - it becomes a carte blanche for anything from legitimate, unavoidable challenges to poor performance.

And of course, the latter is exactly the point. Avoidance of accountability.

AoD

The problem is that setting a date (say, 2032) instantly leads to media hysteria the second it's inevitably missed and politicians take a fall for something that is really nobody's fault.

There is a need to set some level of expectation for the public - but also an understanding that projects this scale can not and should not be held to a hard completion date which "fail" if they don't hit it. There are a million legitimate reasons why a target date may need to be adjusted.

If the media was capable of portraying a target date as that, a target, it wouldn't be a problem. The problem is that Global News is more than happy to throw up an article saying "COLOSSAL FAILURE - ONTARIO LINE MISSING CRITICAL DEADLINE BY 3 MONTHS" as if heads should roll for a moving target being shifted for reasonable reasons.

 

[nfitz]

The problem is that setting a date (say, 2032) instantly leads to media hysteria the second it's inevitably missed and politicians take a fall for something that is really nobody's fault.

They have set a date. And it's public.

Whether Metrolinx "commits" to the date or not has no meaning. Nothing changes if they say yes or no.

 

[AlvinofDiaspar]

The problem is that setting a date (say, 2032) instantly leads to media hysteria the second it's inevitably missed and politicians take a fall for something that is really nobody's fault.

There is a need to set some level of expectation for the public - but also an understanding that projects this scale can not and should not be held to a hard completion date which "fail" if they don't hit it. There are a million legitimate reasons why a target date may need to be adjusted.

If the media was capable of portraying a target date as that, a target, it wouldn't be a problem. The problem is that Global News is more than happy to throw up an article saying "COLOSSAL FAILURE - ONTARIO LINE MISSING CRITICAL DEADLINE BY 3 MONTHS" as if heads should roll for a moving target being shifted for reasonable reasons.

Media/issue management is one issue, but it is also a convenient label to excuse outright failures as hysteria - e.g. Eglinton LRT. Without a firm, reasonable date - you can't tell failure from successes, and I think the public - in a democracy - has every single right to a reasonable date for project completion.

AoD

 

[wopchop]

If there is a contract in place for the work, there is 100% a contractual date of substantial completion and occupancy. Not announcing that date is 100% a political move.