[AKS]

It's also the world's most expensive airport to use, which can partly be blamed on Ottawa for charging a high rent.

Are you referring to the airport tax? It's not so bad in Toronto compared to a few other places in Canada. Tokyo is around $24 or so. Osaka is $35? Seoul is up there too.

But I find the fuel surcharge or whatever they call it to be terrible. A ticket that costs $99 might end up being $250 or $300 after all fees.

 

[urbanfan89]

Are you referring to the airport tax? It's not so bad in Toronto compared to a few other places in Canada. Tokyo is around $24 or so. Osaka is $35? Seoul is up there too.

But I find the fuel surcharge or whatever they call it to be terrible. A ticket that costs $99 might end up being $250 or $300 after all fees.

Overall YYZ is the world's most expensive airport for airline landing fees, service prices, passenger taxes, and so forth:

http://www.cbc.ca/money/story/2005/11/15/gtaa-051115.html

It's a shame that flying Seattle-Buffalo and renting a car is cheaper than flying Toronto-Vancouver direct.

 

[kEiThZ]

If that were implemented on the TTC then you can guarantee that bus ridership would fall sharply and bigger parking lots will be needed at Finch, Kennedy, Kipling, etc.

I still don't see why bus ridership would drop. Simply because the buses are under a different system, people would stop taking the bus?

Anyway, you still can't ignore the problem of using tax dollars to fund two entities that compete against each other.

We let GO operate inside Toronto. Isn't that competition? Nobody complains about that.

Why should there be a distinction between modes of transport?

It's not the modes per se but the capacities and capabilities they are dealing with. The TTC is pretty terrible at local/neighbourhood transport particularly out in the burbs. A bus company would not be this myopic.

Also, with the subway now stretching into the 905, and metrolinx looking to add more LRT in the 416 (Transit City) and the 905 (eventual VIVA LRT), I think there is a case to be made for combining GO, VIVA and TTC rail, because TTC rail is going to keep expanding into the 905 while bus service will keep on being restricted to the 416.. TTC's bus components could simply become a local bus service like every other bus service in the GTA.

Urban planning wise, Toronto is truly unique in the world. We share a bit of European-level density and transit modal split, Asian-like clusters of residential skyscrapers clustered in the region, and North American-like cultural values and suburban sprawl.

Therefore the solution must be unique as well.

So that end we give a monopoly to a single transit service who in turn gives a monopoly to a few unions for its labour.....that's Torontos unique sense of planning for ya.....

Why not extend it further and declare that someone travelling from Mississauga to, say, the zoo will have a seamless system and only pay one fare?

I seriously don't see why one fare can't apply. Indeed after the new line is built, someone will be able to take the subway from Vaughan to downtown Toronto or Scarborough for one fare. And if we ever extend the subway into Mississauga, exactly the scenario you deride here would come true.

If there are people taking a slower route just to save a few dimes every day, then the model is flawed.

You mean like the many folks who live near a GO station today and take the TTC?

If buses and trains are actively competing for passengers (when both are being funded by the same source), then something's wrong.

Most people happen to think that choice is good for the consumer. In London for example, I saw people who had time and wanted to save money take buses instead of the tube for short to medium distance.

It used to be the pride of the city. Thanks to a decade of being choked for funding and political neglect (to the extent that huge sections of the subway need urgent repairs NOW), that's no longer the case.

Wait till the union hears about all the funds coming in from Metrolinx and demand their cut.... The TTC has plenty of investment. They used it to pay bus drivers 53k a year to start (more than an Air Canada regional co-pilot).

GTAA...I can't remember how many times I've been nickeled and dimed for things that are supposed to be free.

It's also the world's most expensive airport to use, which can partly be blamed on Ottawa for charging a high rent.

Funny, I've use Pearson many times and I have never paid anything other than the airport improvement fee which is cheaper than many places in the world, and with a new terminal that is also better than many in the world. Aside from which, much of their costs comes from the hundreds of millions of dollars in rent that the federal government collects (only in Canada....sigh). The GTAA is a model for how privatization can work and will benefit the taxpayer.

 

[urbanfan89]

I still don't see why bus ridership would drop. Simply because the buses are under a different system, people would stop taking the bus?

The subway system is profitable. The buses are not. Therefore the subway fares will fall and passengers will have to pay a more expensive fare (or put up with higher taxes $) to continue their journey. Either way bus ridership will fall.

We let GO operate inside Toronto. Isn't that competition? Nobody complains about that.

It's a deeply flawed type of competition. First GO and TTC only compete for a very small minority of passengers. Second, they should not be competing when they are funded by the same taxpayers and should be part of the same system.

It's not the modes per se but the capacities and capabilities they are dealing with. The TTC is pretty terrible at local/neighbourhood transport particularly out in the burbs. A bus company would not be this myopic.

Fine. Separate it into divisions with wide autonomy over their operations, and ensure they share a single fare system.

Also, with the subway now stretching into the 905, and metrolinx looking to add more LRT in the 416 (Transit City) and the 905 (eventual VIVA LRT), I think there is a case to be made for combining GO, VIVA and TTC rail, because TTC rail is going to keep expanding into the 905 while bus service will keep on being restricted to the 416.. TTC's bus components could simply become a local bus service like every other bus service in the GTA.

Bus service will be restricted to the 416? Maybe if I have a bridge to sell...

So that end we give a monopoly to a single transit service who in turn gives a monopoly to a few unions for its labour.....that's Torontos unique sense of planning for ya.....

No, Metrolinx and its affiliates have a monopoly, and perhaps private entities are allowed to bid for the franchises. Something like London's system, except the average rider doesn't need to know this.

I seriously don't see why one fare can't apply. Indeed after the new line is built, someone will be able to take the subway from Vaughan to downtown Toronto or Scarborough for one fare. And if we ever extend the subway into Mississauga, exactly the scenario you deride here would come true.

Why do we need to wait until billions of $$$ are spent on a Mississauga subway? You should be able to travel from anywhere to anywhere under one fare.

You mean like the many folks who live near a GO station today and take the TTC?

Relative to the 1.5 million who take the TTC every day, it's a very small minority.

Most people happen to think that choice is good for the consumer. In London for example, I saw people who had time and wanted to save money take buses instead of the tube for short to medium distance.

Buses are for short and medium distance journeys. Trains are for long distance journeys. What I would be opposed is if masses of people take a rumbling bus from North York to Downtown simply to save a few dimes.

Wait till the union hears about all the funds coming in from Metrolinx and demand their cut.... The TTC has plenty of investment. They used it to pay bus drivers 53k a year to start (more than an Air Canada regional co-pilot).

If the TTC has plenty of investment then I have a bridge to sell you. I really don't think that contracting out operations will lower costs or prevent strikes (just ask any YRT commuter today).

Funny, I've use Pearson many times and I have never paid anything other than the airport improvement fee which is cheaper than many places in the world, and with a new terminal that is also better than many in the world. Aside from which, much of their costs comes from the hundreds of millions of dollars in rent that the federal government collects (only in Canada....sigh). The GTAA is a model for how privatization can work and will benefit the taxpayer.

The airline landing fees, airside services, taxes, and so forth make YYZ the #1 expensive airport in the world. It's cheaper to drive to Buffalo, fly to Bellingham, and drive to Vancouver than to fly direct. That should tell you something.

 

[kEiThZ]

The subway system is profitable. The buses are not. Therefore the subway fares will fall and passengers will have to pay a more expensive fare (or put up with higher taxes $) to continue their journey. Either way bus ridership will fall.

So what if bus ridership falls? It's far more efficient to have people on rails for long distance trips than it is for them to take buses. Does it make sense for people to bus all the way across Scarborough to Don Mills to hit a subway to go downtown, when the Go Agincourt, could them to Union in a third of the time? Ideological adherence to one solution is a recipe for disaster....

It's a deeply flawed type of competition. First GO and TTC only compete for a very small minority of passengers. Second, they should not be competing when they are funded by the same taxpayers and should be part of the same system.
...
Relative to the 1.5 million who take the TTC every day, it's a very small minority.

The only reason they compete for a small minority of passengers is because they operate separately with separate fares. How many people would still be riding the subway to Union if the GO Train was an option? In certain instances GO buses are becoming more popular too...STC to York by GO bus for example....try that trip on the subway.

Fine. Separate it into divisions with wide autonomy over their operations, and ensure they share a single fare system.

So if its separated...what's the argument? I have argued that TTC or Metrolinx should become a TfL type of agency and take over the rail systems so that there is unified service. They would obviously have an integrated fare structure.

Bus service will be restricted to the 416? Maybe if I have a bridge to sell...

Why would it not be restricted to the 416? For any private bus company or a TTC bus company to operate outside the 416 would require licenses from those cities where they wished to operate. Only those cities willing to allow competition would license other bus service providers. And if they did, so what? They would be doing what they deem to be in the best interest of their citizens.

No, Metrolinx and its affiliates have a monopoly, and perhaps private entities are allowed to bid for the franchises. Something like London's system, except the average rider doesn't need to know this.

You are confused. This is exactly what I have been advocating all along. A transparent system where the rider just has to swipe a card to get on. He/She does not care who is providing the service. And it's all the better if multiple companies are competing for his/her single swipe.

Why do we need to wait until billions of $$$ are spent on a Mississauga subway? You should be able to travel from anywhere to anywhere under one fare.

Agreed and its exactly our current idiotic structure that prevents us from doing that. The TTC even refuses to play nice on Presto. That's why putting long distance travel under one authority (be they public or private) would IMHO remove the barriers to inter-regional travel that there are in Toronto.

Buses are for short and medium distance journeys. Trains are for long distance journeys. What I would be opposed is if masses of people take a rumbling bus from North York to Downtown simply to save a few dimes.

By the same logic, does it make sense that millions ride subways to work when they should be going to the nearest GO station to head to Union? Or that a student has to trundle by bus and subway all the way across Toronto instead of just catching the GO bus from STC just to 'save a few dimes.'

If the TTC has plenty of investment then I have a bridge to sell you. I really don't think that contracting out operations will lower costs or prevent strikes (just ask any YRT commuter today).

You cite the YRT. Now show me a successful bus driver strike in London that paralyzed the system. The YRT used the TTC's monopoly model, that's why their screwed.

The airline landing fees, airside services, taxes, and so forth make YYZ the #1 expensive airport in the world. It's cheaper to drive to Buffalo, fly to Bellingham, and drive to Vancouver than to fly direct. That should tell you something.

Tell's me that Canada is the only country in developed world that sucks revenue out of its airports instead of investing in them. Only those charges you cite is entirely a result of this federal policy. 1 in 3 dollars collected at Pearson head's to Ottawa as rent. The GTAA has done a phenomenal job as a not-for-profit agency. I severely doubt that a governmental authority would have been able to pull of the T1 redevelopment on schedule and on budget like the GTAA has. In fact, project managers and engineers from around the world regularly visit Pearson to see how things are done.

 

[urbanfan89]

So what if bus ridership falls? It's far more efficient to have people on rails for long distance trips than it is for them to take buses. Does it make sense for people to bus all the way across Scarborough to Don Mills to hit a subway to go downtown, when the Go Agincourt, could them to Union in a third of the time? Ideological adherence to one solution is a recipe for disaster....

Joe lives at Don Mills and Steeles and works downtown. Currently he can either drive to the subway station OR take the bus to the subway every day, both for the same amount of money. He chooses to take both bus and subway to save the fuel costs.

If you make Joe pay two fares on his commute, what will he do? Drive to the subway, of course!

The only reason they compete for a small minority of passengers is because they operate separately with separate fares. How many people would still be riding the subway to Union if the GO Train was an option? In certain instances GO buses are becoming more popular too...STC to York by GO bus for example....try that trip on the subway.

Which is why GO and TTC should share fares...same with every other system in the region.

So if its separated...what's the argument? I have argued that TTC or Metrolinx should become a TfL type of agency and take over the rail systems so that there is unified service. They would obviously have an integrated fare structure.

Why not take a step further and put all buses in this system so they share the same fares as all the rail systems?

Why would it not be restricted to the 416? For any private bus company or a TTC bus company to operate outside the 416 would require licenses from those cities where they wished to operate.

This creates inefficiencies and waste of resources. Why is it that TTC route 50 and MT route 26 ply the same route and restrict their stops purely based on arbitrary lines on the map? Common sense says that everyone will be better off if the two routes were merged.

Only those cities willing to allow competition would license other bus service providers. And if they did, so what? They would be doing what they deem to be in the best interest of their citizens.

It's an unnecessary duplication of tax dollars, which I illustrated above. Besides, in Britain you had bus companies doing very dirty tricks to undermine competitors. You even had bus drivers burning the garages of the rival companies!

You are confused. This is exactly what I have been advocating all along. A transparent system where the rider just has to swipe a card to get on. He/She does not care who is providing the service. And it's all the better if multiple companies are competing for his/her single swipe.

Agreed and its exactly our current idiotic structure that prevents us from doing that. The TTC even refuses to play nice on Presto. That's why putting long distance travel under one authority (be they public or private) would IMHO remove the barriers to inter-regional travel that there are in Toronto.

Why not take a step further and put ALL travel under one authority so a network is a network?

By the same logic, does it make sense that millions ride subways to work when they should be going to the nearest GO station to head to Union? Or that a student has to trundle by bus and subway all the way across Toronto instead of just catching the GO bus from STC just to 'save a few dimes.'

No and no.

You cite the YRT. Now show me a successful bus driver strike in London that paralyzed the system. The YRT used the TTC's monopoly model, that's why their screwed.

Now that you asked for it: http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/england/london/7587139.stm

Tell's me that Canada is the only country in developed world that sucks revenue out of its airports instead of investing in them.

Not only that. All of Britain's main airports are owned by BAA, which skims the profits from the airport into shareholder dividends while neglecting investment (if you've been to Heathrow you know what I mean; even T5 is hopelessly overbudget). Luckily they were recently ordered to sell some airports.

Only those charges you cite is entirely a result of this federal policy. 1 in 3 dollars collected at Pearson head's to Ottawa as rent. The GTAA has done a phenomenal job as a not-for-profit agency. I severely doubt that a governmental authority would have been able to pull of the T1 redevelopment on schedule and on budget like the GTAA has. In fact, project managers and engineers from around the world regularly visit Pearson to see how things are done.

I think we can agree that projects can be done if politics is kept at a bare minimum here...

 

[kEiThZ]

Joe lives at Don Mills and Steeles and works downtown. Currently he can either drive to the subway station OR take the bus to the subway every day, both for the same amount of money. He chooses to take both bus and subway to save the fuel costs.

If you make Joe pay two fares on his commute, what will he do? Drive to the subway, of course!

This happens today without double fares....which is exactly why the TTC is charging for parking. All you have to do is charge more for parking than the bus fare and your problem is solved.

Which is why GO and TTC should share fares...same with every other system in the region.

Why not take a step further and put all buses in this system so they share the same fares as all the rail systems?

Combining rail for example would allow zone fares. It is a ridiculous that a high schooler who rides 10 mins to go to school in a suburb subsidizes the stock broker who rides all the way downtown. Adding buses to the system would bascially ensure that this practice continues, except now someone from Barrie is paying the same fare as said high school kid....in your single-fare monolithic system

This creates inefficiencies and waste of resources. Why is it that TTC route 50 and MT route 26 ply the same route and restrict their stops purely based on arbitrary lines on the map? Common sense says that everyone will be better off if the two routes were merged.

Agreed. But given the realities of our political system, my suggestion is a lot more likely to happen than combining all transit in the GTA under one roof.

It's an unnecessary duplication of tax dollars, which I illustrated above. Besides, in Britain you had bus companies doing very dirty tricks to undermine competitors. You even had bus drivers burning the garages of the rival companies!

I happened to believe that Canadians are a lot more civil and won't resort to dirty tricks or criminal behaviour to attract customers. What's more, even if they did, in the end it is the customer who benefits from competition. And how are tax dollars wasted if more private capital is invested?

Now that you asked for it: http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/england/london/7587139.stm

You proved my point. The worst they have is 2500 out of 28000 bus drivers on strike...affecting 14% of the network. And the Tube still running. Inconvenient perhaps but certainly not crippling. Now given our double monopoly in Toronto, what would have happened if that was the 416? Oh wait, we have a great example of that:

http://www.thestar.com/News/GTA/article/418713

A great list of crippling strikes here:

http://www.toronto.ca/ttc/history.htm

1952, 1970, 1974, 1978, 1991, 1999, 2006, 2008...

Not only that. All of Britain's main airports are owned by BAA, which skims the profits from the airport into shareholder dividends while neglecting investment (if you've been to Heathrow you know what I mean; even T5 is hopelessly overbudget). Luckily they were recently ordered to sell some airports.

You are being deceptive. The GTAA is a private agency but it is a not-for-profit. It is one of the best airport managers in the world and is doing so with the deck stacked against it by the federal government. You resort to bring in some far flung failure as an example when we have evidence that privatization works in our backyard. Sure Heathrow T5 is a mess..but why don't you talk about Pearson T1.....on time...on budget....and started without a hiccup. And remember privatization does not mean for profit. It could just mean a private not-for-profit agency....like the GTAA.

 

[nfitz]

It's a shame that flying Seattle-Buffalo and renting a car is cheaper than flying Toronto-Vancouver direct.

Have you tried that? How do you deal with the (very odd) law that if you try and rent a car in the USA and drive it into Canada (as a Canadian resident) that they sieze the car at the border? (and living in Toronto, with family in both Seattle and Vancouver, this is one that frustrates me no end).

 

[urbanfan89]

This happens today without double fares....which is exactly why the TTC is charging for parking. All you have to do is charge more for parking than the bus fare and your problem is solved.

I've been thinking that a fare-by-distance or fare-by-time system would eliminate this problem: everything is under one roof, and the longer you travel the more you pay. Difference is, that the fastest way is the cheapest way in order to save everyone time and money.

Combining rail for example would allow zone fares. It is a ridiculous that a high schooler who rides 10 mins to go to school in a suburb subsidizes the stock broker who rides all the way downtown. Adding buses to the system would bascially ensure that this practice continues, except now someone from Barrie is paying the same fare as said high school kid....in your single-fare monolithic system

Single fare system != flat fare throughout the network...

Agreed. But given the realities of our political system, my suggestion is a lot more likely to happen than combining all transit in the GTA under one roof.

Given that we already have a mentality that all transit must cooperate to maximize public benefit, my proposal is arguably the most efficient. Most likely, maybe not...

I happened to believe that Canadians are a lot more civil and won't resort to dirty tricks or criminal behaviour to attract customers.

You've probably never heard of Bre X: billions bilked from investors, phony samples, suspicious deaths, CEO retiring to the Bahamas, and no one ever sent to jail. Yeah, Canadians won't resort to dirty tricks...

What's more, even if they did, in the end it is the customer who benefits from competition. And how are tax dollars wasted if more private capital is invested?

Guess how bus riders reacted to this bag of dirty tricks?

You proved my point. The worst they have is 2500 out of 28000 bus drivers on strike...affecting 14% of the network. And the Tube still running. Inconvenient perhaps but certainly not crippling. Now given our double monopoly in Toronto, what would have happened if that was the 416? Oh wait, we have a great example of that:

http://www.thestar.com/News/GTA/article/418713

A great list of crippling strikes here:

http://www.toronto.ca/ttc/history.htm

1952, 1970, 1974, 1978, 1991, 1999, 2006, 2008...

Perhaps splitting the bus services into, say, 10 different contracts across the GTAH and allowing private contractors to bid for them will eliminate this problem. Of course Bob Kinnear will shut down the system for a year before this happens.

You are being deceptive. The GTAA is a private agency but it is a not-for-profit. It is one of the best airport managers in the world and is doing so with the deck stacked against it by the federal government. You resort to bring in some far flung failure as an example when we have evidence that privatization works in our backyard. Sure Heathrow T5 is a mess..but why don't you talk about Pearson T1.....on time...on budget....and started without a hiccup. And remember privatization does not mean for profit. It could just mean a private not-for-profit agency....like the GTAA.

We'll leave this issue here, since it has nothing to do with transit and since I've already said that some private involvement in inevitable.

 

[rbt]

Perhaps splitting the bus services into, say, 10 different contracts across the GTAH and allowing private contractors to bid for them will eliminate this problem. Of course Bob Kinnear will shut down the system for a year before this happens.

Would not make any difference. Sympathy strikes are pretty common when employees aren't being treated fairly at one of the employers.

If they thought it would help, TTC employees could go on strike over the pay of Viva employees. If you purposefully broke up the union contracts into multiple parts, this kind of cross-contract assistance would become common.

In fact, might give the employees more power if 9 other employers and were calling the first to demand they get back to the negotiating table.

I have no doubt that if York Region or TTC attempted to run transit to replace Viva that all York Region transit employees would strike.


Unions are employee owned corporations in control of the manpower -- making the union far larger than the individual employers would not end up any better than having IBM providing 100% of the IT staff at all major Canadian banks.


If you want to break the union then you need to give the employer more options than the union. If the union bankrupted 1 of the 10 employers it doesn't mean much.

 

[kEiThZ]

I've been thinking that a fare-by-distance or fare-by-time system would eliminate this problem: everything is under one roof, and the longer you travel the more you pay. Difference is, that the fastest way is the cheapest way in order to save everyone time and money.

Now the interesting part, if you don't split off the bus service, how do you propose to implement fare by distance for buses.

Given that we already have a mentality that all transit must cooperate to maximize public benefit, my proposal is arguably the most efficient. Most likely, maybe not...

I'd agree it's the most efficient, but probably not the most effective...There's the ideal world and the real world. Toronto would never agree to handing over the TTC and the 905 would be highly suspicious of any effort to combine the TTC with their services. Combining GO and TTC rail might be far more achievable. And the city would probably be willing to see the costs handed off to the province or the GTA.

You've probably never heard of Bre X: billions bilked from investors, phony samples, suspicious deaths, CEO retiring to the Bahamas, and no one ever sent to jail. Yeah, Canadians won't resort to dirty tricks...

That's a rather cheap shot example and you know it. You were referring to violent actions earlier. When was the last time a Canadian bus driver burned down a garage?

Perhaps splitting the bus services into, say, 10 different contracts across the GTAH and allowing private contractors to bid for them will eliminate this problem. Of course Bob Kinnear will shut down the system for a year before this happens.

So now you see my suggestion has some merit.... As for the union, well, I am sure negotiating for ten contracts will start to make things challenging....

We'll leave this issue here, since it has nothing to do with transit and since I've already said that some private involvement in inevitable.

Hey, you're the one who couldn't accept that we have good examples of private companies providing excellent transport services in the GTA....the GTAA and VIVA.

 

[Maggie]

duel at dawn

Urbanfan89 and Kiethz you guys should just have a duel with pistols at dawn. You both make some excellent points.

Now I have a question for both of you because you both seem to know alot more about transportation issues than the average joe, and anyone else who might know. The question is this who has the oversight of the TTC? The TTC has an audit done annually by the APTA but that is an American organization. Nowhere can I find if the TTC is run or guided by the Rail road act of Canada or the rail road safety act. Please advise to where I could look or research.

 

[kEiThZ]

Urbanfan89 and Kiethz you guys should just have a duel with pistols at dawn. You both make some excellent points.

Now I have a question for both of you because you both seem to know alot more about transportation issues than the average joe, and anyone else who might know. The question is this who has the oversight of the TTC? The TTC has an audit done annually by the APTA but that is an American organization. Nowhere can I find if the TTC is run or guided by the Rail road act of Canada or the rail road safety act. Please advise to where I could look or research.

Sorry...can't say....I would assume that you could email the TTC to ask them for that information....t

As to my duel with urbanfan89....I am sure it's because we both want what's best for Toronto. I certainly respect his point of view. And it's only such debates that will help us find the best solution for TdoT!

 

[kEiThZ]

As we discuss how best to facilitate and fund the construction of subways into York Region, I thought it might be alright to revive this thread and ask if the TTC should be broken up...ie separate the subway from the LRT and bus services, thereby, focusing the subway system on developing in a more regional as opposed to a Toronto-centric fashion.

 

[urbanfan89]

The subway system is not likely to expand at all into the 905, apart from the Yonge and Spadina extensions. It will be best for every transit system in the entire Metrolinx zone to have a single fare system, either by distance or by time. The TTC could be operationally split up into subway and local bus/streetcar/LRT divisions, but ultimately it would still be part of the big Metrolinx "family" of transit services and the brand would only exist for customer convenience.