2024 BC Election

[Colin Parkinson]

One of the bigger Elephants in the room...

Les Leyne: Election campaigns may sail past B.C. Ferries' lurking problem

Much of the good news stems from one event: the half-billion dollar, one-time bail-out the government granted the corporation last year.

www.timescolonist.com

Time to treat as part of the highway system it is, rather than a pretend private company. Stop advertising, we all know you need to take a ferry on and off the island. Reduce the top level pay and get some boring good performers there that just want to run a sound and regular ship.

 

[Brad Sallows]

Is it any more unfair than free use of highways, bridges and tunnels?

Everyone uses highways, bridges, and tunnels. Not everyone uses ferries.

The customarily insolvent routes are the smaller ones, serving places in which some of the locals complain about people coming to their little island paradises. Some BC taxpayers, particularly in the interior, are disinterested in subsidizing ferry transportation for people who essentially want others to f*ck off.

 

[daftandbarmy]

Everyone uses highways, bridges, and tunnels. Not everyone uses ferries.

The customarily insolvent routes are the smaller ones, serving places in which some of the locals complain about people coming to their little island paradises. Some BC taxpayers, particularly in the interior, are disinterested in subsidizing ferry transportation for people who essentially want others to f*ck off.

All the ferries in the Interior of BC are free, about a dozen or so that cross various lakes etc, and far fewer people use them than the coastal ferries.

Thus presenting the dichotomy

 

[Cloud Cover]

In many cases the ferries in the interior exist because people n the coast made deals to flood valleys in the interior to create power dams to generate electricity to be sold to Americans with the profit pocketed by the coastal governments.

 

[Halifax Tar]

Is it any more unfair than free use of highways, bridges and tunnels?

I'm all for tolled highways. As long as the tolls go straight and only into maintain the highways.

Less taxes and user fees.

 

[daftandbarmy]

In many cases the ferries in the interior exist because people n the coast made deals to flood valleys in the interior to create power dams to generate electricity to be sold to Americans with the profit pocketed by the coastal governments.

Except that Bill Bennett was from Kelowna, and alot of the other people who led those mega projects were from the Interior of BC with overwhelming Social Credit (right winger) support.

Bill Bennett - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

 

[Brad Sallows]

"Yeah, but" isn't much of a counterpoint if the "but" is something so small that most people don't even know about it, let alone take advantage of it. Increase fares.

We did have some bridge tolls before the government got rid of them. I get that it was a popular move, and that economically it can make sense either way. Without tolls, people simply choose whatever routes are best. With tolls, it works only if tolls are applied equally everywhere, so that people don't start creating new traffic problems by trying to game "free" routes.

There is still the problem that the subsidy likely has to keep increasing if the fare increases don't keep up with operating cost increases. That chokes out other spending, the same way ever-increasing transit subsidies gradually choke out other municipal spending.

 

[Kirkhill]

"Yeah, but" isn't much of a counterpoint if the "but" is something so small that most people don't even know about it, let alone take advantage of it. Increase fares.

We did have some bridge tolls before the government got rid of them. I get that it was a popular move, and that economically it can make sense either way. Without tolls, people simply choose whatever routes are best. With tolls, it works only if tolls are applied equally everywhere, so that people don't start creating new traffic problems by trying to game "free" routes.

There is still the problem that the subsidy likely has to keep increasing if the fare increases don't keep up with operating cost increases. That chokes out other spending, the same way ever-increasing transit subsidies gradually choke out other municipal spending.

Interesting point on "what is a public good?" though.

What stuff should be funded universally out of general revenues? Crown corporations? Public Private Partnerships? The market at large?

Our first major comms link, the railway, was a PPP which became a Crown Corp which was Privatized (IIRC). Same thing, kind of ish, with air transport.

Philosophically there is no reason why some, or all, air transport, particularly to the North, couldn't be funded the same way that highways are funded in the south.

 

[Brad Sallows]

What stuff should be funded universally out of general revenues?

Maybe just not anything for which the rates of cost increases are greater than the rate of general revenue increase. Or, all the cost increases above the rate of general revenue increases have to be covered by user fees.

 

[Kirkhill]

Maybe just not anything for which the rates of cost increases are greater than the rate of general revenue increase. Or, all the cost increases above the rate of general revenue increases have to be covered by user fees.

It would be an interesting calculation -

For example if, at the beginning of a cycle, it were determined that it was in the national interest to create a line of communication, for strategic, military, political or commercial benefit, funded at public expense - but then it were discovered that that line of communication were accessing a major revenue stream - does it then make sense to keep the line in the public domain, funded by tax revenues from the new income, or does it make more sense to privatize the link?

The history of the highways suggests that keeping that link in the public domain is a viable answer, economically and politically.
On the other hand the shipping of rails, air and shipping suggests that the answer is less clear cut.

 

[Brad Sallows]

It would be an interesting calculation -

For example if, at the beginning of a cycle, it were determined that it was in the national interest to create a line of communication, for strategic, military, political or commercial benefit, funded at public expense - but then it were discovered that that line of communication were accessing a major revenue stream - does it then make sense to keep the line in the public domain, funded by tax revenues from the new income, or does it make more sense to privatize the link?

The history of the highways suggests that keeping that link in the public domain is a viable answer, economically and politically.
On the other hand the shipping of rails, air and shipping suggests that the answer is less clear cut.

The answer isn't that clear-cut for roads. Plenty of roads in BC - and presumably elsewhere in Canada - are paid for by private enterprises that use them to access resources.

The Coquihalla highway in BC used to have a $10 (for passenger vehicles, more for other classes) toll that was originally intended to pay only for the cost of construction (whatever that amounted to). It was kept going longer than necessary (ie. generated more revenue), and eventually discontinued. The toll could have been kept going but for the promise, I suppose. The route cut roughly an hour of driving time between Kamloops and Hope. What inhibits private involvement in roads is up-front cost, and lack of opportunities to create a route which attracts drivers willing to pay for convenience. The hurdle is easier for short legs - bridges and tunnels - that present opportunities to dramatically cut driving times.

A point of note is that the Coquihalla didn't have any tolled competition. If a mix of public and private tolled routes existed, I'd anticipate a few things:

• the public options would tend to be less well-managed, and have more difficulty remaining solvent
• the solvency issue would lead to some f*ckery by politicians and bureaucrats trying to favour the public options
• there would be purely ideological f*ckery, too, from the people who favour public solutions in principle
• the private options would generate different kinds of f*ckery - lobbying for subsidies and exclusivity, generalized grift

 

[childs56]

The answer isn't that clear-cut for roads. Plenty of roads in BC - and presumably elsewhere in Canada - are paid for by private enterprises that use them to access resources.

The Coquihalla highway in BC used to have a $10 (for passenger vehicles, more for other classes) toll that was originally intended to pay only for the cost of construction (whatever that amounted to). It was kept going longer than necessary (ie. generated more revenue), and eventually discontinued. The toll could have been kept going but for the promise, I suppose. The route cut roughly an hour of driving time between Kamloops and Hope. What inhibits private involvement in roads is up-front cost, and lack of opportunities to create a route which attracts drivers willing to pay for convenience. The hurdle is easier for short legs - bridges and tunnels - that present opportunities to dramatically cut driving times.

A point of note is that the Coquihalla didn't have any tolled competition. If a mix of public and private tolled routes existed, I'd anticipate a few things:

• the public options would tend to be less well-managed, and have more difficulty remaining solvent
• the solvency issue would lead to some f*ckery by politicians and bureaucrats trying to favour the public options
• there would be purely ideological f*ckery, too, from the people who favour public solutions in principle
• the private options would generate different kinds of f*ckery - lobbying for subsidies and exclusivity, generalized grift

since the BC government took over control and maintenance for the Coq maintenance has gone to the way side. I did not mind paying $10 to drive a highway that was well maintained and kept me safe. Especially since a alternative was available and I was not forced to pay the toll. Cutting a hour off travel time use to make a difference of getting the ferry to the island or wasting more time sitting at the terminal that could have been used for fishing and visiting family and friends.

 

[Kirkhill]

The answer isn't that clear-cut for roads. Plenty of roads in BC - and presumably elsewhere in Canada - are paid for by private enterprises that use them to access resources.

The Coquihalla highway in BC used to have a $10 (for passenger vehicles, more for other classes) toll that was originally intended to pay only for the cost of construction (whatever that amounted to). It was kept going longer than necessary (ie. generated more revenue), and eventually discontinued. The toll could have been kept going but for the promise, I suppose. The route cut roughly an hour of driving time between Kamloops and Hope. What inhibits private involvement in roads is up-front cost, and lack of opportunities to create a route which attracts drivers willing to pay for convenience. The hurdle is easier for short legs - bridges and tunnels - that present opportunities to dramatically cut driving times.

A point of note is that the Coquihalla didn't have any tolled competition. If a mix of public and private tolled routes existed, I'd anticipate a few things:

• the public options would tend to be less well-managed, and have more difficulty remaining solvent
• the solvency issue would lead to some f*ckery by politicians and bureaucrats trying to favour the public options
• there would be purely ideological f*ckery, too, from the people who favour public solutions in principle
• the private options would generate different kinds of f*ckery - lobbying for subsidies and exclusivity, generalized grift

I paid the Coq toll quite a few times.

The question about Toll vs Public is an interesting one. In the States and Europe it is fairly common to have both options available and it becomes an issue resolved by each driver as part of their route planning.

The only Canadian comparison I know, outside of the Coq vs Hwy 1 comparison, is Hwy 401 and 407 in Ontario.

I never took the Hwy 1 route after the Coq opened - rockslides, twists and turns, towns, speed limits, traffic bottlenecks all made the $10 fee well worth the paying.

On the other hand the 407 doesn't seem to get near the traffic that the 401 does. I got the sense that the vast majority of 407 users were commercial users whose tolls were picked up by their employers. Lots of long horizons on those days I drove the 407. The 401 was bumper to bumper.
...

Another interesting case was the Fort Langley ferry. That used to be free. Then they built a bridge. And that was tolled.

To be honest I seldom used either the ferry or the bridge.

Is the Port Mann still tolled?

 

[daftandbarmy]

Is the Port Mann still tolled?

Not since 2017

Port Mann Bridge - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

 

[Brad Sallows]

I paid the Coq toll quite a few times.

The question about Toll vs Public is an interesting one. In the States and Europe it is fairly common to have both options available and it becomes an issue resolved by each driver as part of their route planning.

The only Canadian comparison I know, outside of the Coq vs Hwy 1 comparison, is Hwy 401 and 407 in Ontario.

I never took the Hwy 1 route after the Coq opened - rockslides, twists and turns, towns, speed limits, traffic bottlenecks all made the $10 fee well worth the paying.

On the other hand the 407 doesn't seem to get near the traffic that the 401 does. I got the sense that the vast majority of 407 users were commercial users whose tolls were picked up by their employers. Lots of long horizons on those days I drove the 407. The 401 was bumper to bumper.
...

Another interesting case was the Fort Langley ferry. That used to be free. Then they built a bridge. And that was tolled.

To be honest I seldom used either the ferry or the bridge.

Is the Port Mann still tolled?

Highway 1 through the Fraser and Thompson canyons has been wonderful since the Coquihalla opened - light traffic.

The NDP dropped the Golden Ears and Port Mann tolls. It was an election promise. They also froze and reduced ferry fares (another promise). It isn't sensible to have some crossings tolled and others not; it tends to drive unreasonable amounts of traffic to the non-tolled crossings (people willing to trade time for a couple of bucks).

 

[daftandbarmy]

None of them were remotely inspirational. I'd give the showing a solid C- at best, sadly. Poor old BC:

Rob Shaw: Rustad's cadaverous debate performance may be enough to stall surging Conservatives

BC Conservative leader needed a standout moment, but delivered monotone responses that failed to counter NDP attacks

www.biv.com

 

[daftandbarmy]

I wondered about that too... oops!

Rustad changes story on fatal overdose coroner had no record of​

B.C. Conservative leader had claimed at televised debate that he saw overdose at Robson and Hornby streets​

https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/british-columbia/john-rustad-fatal-overdose-1.7348135

 

[Colin Parkinson]

I wondered about that too... oops!

Rustad changes story on fatal overdose coroner had no record of​

B.C. Conservative leader had claimed at televised debate that he saw overdose at Robson and Hornby streets​

https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/british-columbia/john-rustad-fatal-overdose-1.7348135

Seeing an OD is fairly common downtown, whether or not that person died would likely be an unknown. So likley he saw a OD.

 

[Colin Parkinson]

It would be an interesting calculation -

For example if, at the beginning of a cycle, it were determined that it was in the national interest to create a line of communication, for strategic, military, political or commercial benefit, funded at public expense - but then it were discovered that that line of communication were accessing a major revenue stream - does it then make sense to keep the line in the public domain, funded by tax revenues from the new income, or does it make more sense to privatize the link?

The history of the highways suggests that keeping that link in the public domain is a viable answer, economically and politically.
On the other hand the shipping of rails, air and shipping suggests that the answer is less clear cut.

One of the challenges is that government builds something with taxpayers monies and if it is creating revenue, then private companies complain and say they should have access to that revenue generation and you have to sell it to us at less than market price, at which point we are going to do less and charge more. Private companies only want the money generating opportunities, never the ones that do not generate money or have to operate at a loss to provide a service to the people.

 

[Brad Sallows]

I wondered about that too... oops!

Rustad changes story on fatal overdose coroner had no record of​

B.C. Conservative leader had claimed at televised debate that he saw overdose at Robson and Hornby streets​

Great. By exaggerating his point, he allows people to avoid talking about all the other deaths on the streets (for the next few days until the election) by instead talking loudly about one which probably never happened. Fool.

The facts are usually enough to make a point; stick to them. Leave the false onion-belt stories to others.