Dear Editor,
I read with interest Bob Andrew’s contribution to the debate on the Translink vote [‘Vote No. Are We Naïve Or ????’ The Bulletin, April 8th, 2015].
I agree that TransLink has a lot of cultural problems which need to be addressed. Dysfunction within organizations is rife at all levels, right from the family unit all the way up to the top, and has to be addressed on an ongoing basis. TransLink undoubtedly has many imperfections, but it’s the only TransLink we’ve got. Its faulty governance is not in itself an argument against increasing its funding since the transit ballot clearly itemizes what the additional funds will pay for as opposed to “pie in the sky promises.”
I was curious about what a Transportation Economist like Bob Andrew does, so I went to Wikipedia, and under Transportation Economics, found this:
As a result of the transportation systems in use, but not adequately meeting the needs of those who rely on them, they tend to generate low revenue. And with minimal revenue or funding the transportation systems are forced to decrease service and increase fares, which causes those in poverty to face more inequality…. in places with no public transport a car is the only viable option and that creates unnecessary strain on the roads and environment.
….[U]nderfunding of public transportation prevents everyone who needs transportation from having access to it. And those who can choose between public transportation and private transportation will choose private transportation rather than face the inconveniences of [inadequate] public transportation. The lack of customers willing to use public transport creates a cycle that ultimately never leads to the transportation systems making significant progress.
Metro Vancouver has a congestion problem, true. This is not a result of misguided policy as Mr. Andrew suggests, but is a deliberate, and forward-looking, process – in response to the factors noted above – that is: increasing density while narrowing roads and implementing other strategies to favour transit options over individual car driving by making it faster to ‘get there’ by transit [or walking, or cycling] than by car. This is the way of the future. We find, for instance, that ‘millennials’ are eschewing car ownership in favour of car-sharing, transit, and other options. They know what a waste of resources, at every level, car ownership is. I haven’t owned a car since 1987; since moving to Bowen, I’ve ridden Transit roughly twice a day, five days a week, for nearly 18 years (unless a fellow commuter offered me a ride) and banked the difference. So I say thank you to Translink, you’re making me rich. Allow me to return the favour by voting for a modest tax increase.
Other advantages of enhanced transit and increased density, such as reductions in GHG emissions and the suburbanization of valuable agricultural land are self-evident and have been discussed at length elsewhere.
Note that the ‘unspecified body’ which performs the auditing functions will be headed by Jimmy Pattison – BC’s version of Warren Buffett, a hard-headed businessman of unimpeachable integrity [and who answers his own door on Halloween].
The Canadian Taxpayers’ Federation is there to tell us to vote No. That’s what it does.
In the end, I’m guessing that this plebiscite is a test of a major cultural shift. I suspect it has to do with a battle between those who view single-car transport as the norm, versus those who view public transit and other options as the ‘new normal’. ‘Out of my cold dead hands’ would seem to be the sentiment of the NO side, except that this time it’s a steering wheel, not a gun. Years ago, as the project architect working on the VCC-Clark Skytrain Station, at the first site meeting, with the contractors, subtrades, project manager and support staff all present, I asked: how many of you took transit to work this morning? As expected, mine was the only hand up. It’s time to stop treating transit as the sorry second-best and give it the resources it needs to adequately serve our region now and into the future.
-- Michael Epp [Architect AIBC]
