In a post back in August – in The Bateman Strategy – I outlined how to kill the viability of TransLink in five easy steps.
Here’s No. 3:
(3) Maintain that any new programs can be paid for by eliminating ‘waste, fraud and abuse.’ Never give credit for any instances where that actually occurs. TransLink has already had three performance reviews and an audit, it has already saved millions in ‘efficiencies’ (often a euphemism for cuts) – but never mind. Always maintain that spending is ‘out of control.’
.
And here, handily, is this week’s example. First, the instance where savings were made:
February 3, 2014
(NEWS1130) – TransLink is confident it’s solved some of its budget uncertainty.
The transportation authority has made up a … funding gap that could have led to cuts or higher fees next year.
The gap is the result of a decision by the mayors to reject a property tax increase.
That decision by the mayors had actually left a $60 million hole, but TransLink had cut it down to $13 million through savings.
.
Second, an example where this will be completely ignored. It only took two days to find out how that works: Daniel Fontaine in 24 Hours – Whining a losing strategy for Metro Vancouver mayors.
February 5, 2014
During the last provincial election, John Cummins, the former leader of the BC Conservatives, had a rather novel idea when it came to funding future transit projects. He argued that if every municipality cut spending by a mere 1%, they could re-allocate almost $40 million toward much-needed transit projects.
“The Metro Vancouver mayors control operating budgets totalling over $2.9 billion and TransLink spends another $1 billion,” said a BC Conservatives campaign news release. “Finding $40 million through restraint in a budget of nearly $4 billion, is savings of only 1%.”
Had civic politicians taken up Cummins’ challenge and found some loose change within their operating budgets, they could have avoided the political mess they find themselves in today. …
.
Some observations:
(a) TransLink, in the latest round, found more than $40 million to close a budget gap.
(b) $40 million gets you, maybe, a few bus routes. It doesn’t get you the rapid-transit you need to accommodate growth, much less offset the decline in other taxes.
(c) It doesn’t matter.
Because the strategy in the context of the referendum is this:
By aggressively attacking the organization so that those in favour of a new tax will have to defend it before they can argue in favour of its funding, you disarm the proponents before they even begin a ’yes’ campaign.
And then the subsequent cutbacks on local transit services justify another round of criticism of TransLink. No matter what it does (or doesn’t do), it’s screwed.
It’s more than shameful that the federal government is a full-time player in the Willful Ignorance Tournament concerning cities, placing all their eggs instead in the extraction and export of raw resources like it was another gold rush.
Cities are the most powerful engines of the economy, not resources, and successful cities like Singapore, Tokyo, New York, London, Hong Kong, Toronto, Montreal and yes, even Vancouver, prove that you don’t have to have huge deposits of natural resources to create the world’s best economic performances, highest productivity and largest contribution to a nation’s GDP.
Look it up if you don’t believe it. Stats Canada is a good place to start. Would that the Taxpayer’s Federation wasn’t so selective and shallow in their research.
An enlightened federal government would take a few moments to look beyond its party-affiliated lobbyists, campaign donors, ideology, the election cycle, and navel gazing and upon something called The Common Good. Energy security, climate change and unstable resource-based economies loom very large on the horizon and it’s extremely important that the feds participate more in ensuring the welfare of its own urban constituents where, you know, only 85% of the people live.
An enlightened federal government would also recognize that local / regional governance is very important and would seek a stable model in which to entrust its funds. TransLink is not broken, but does need improvement. The alternative is 100% control over Metro transportation by Christy Clark over the heads of 2.4 million people and half the provincial GDP.
Funds and policy are where the real power of a national government rest, and they can be used to negotiate everything, from reversing the devolution of power to the provinces to obtaining massive unit price discounts on volume orders of, for example, passenger rail rolling stock in nation-wide contracts. Ordering thousands of trains and buses nationally will result in much lower per-unit costs and greater benefits like producing radically more content in Canada than any local authority could possibly obtain on individual projects.
In recent years the province has built or announced plans to build about 9 billion dollars in freeways in only two projects, the Port Mann and George Massey. This is before financing is accounted for, which will result in compounded interests pumping the total to around $14B after 35 years. Only a portion of that sum will be recouped in tolls; the provincial debt has already shot up. This is in the total absence of a referendum on this stratospheric expenditure of public money, or notable criticism by the Taxpayer’s Federation.
Imagine if the feds came to town and put $14B on the table earmarked to complete (or build new) the Metro AND Fraser Valley AND Whistler / Pemberton Corridor AND passenger ferry public transit systems under a National Transit Plan and federal Ministry of Urban Affairs. You can be sure the premier will be grinning ear-to-ear and fully cooperating, and the Taxpayer’s Federation will be lighting up the tabloids with their ill-informed, sound bite-laden and highly fragmented commentary.
But above the noise will be a clear and distinct signal, we might just get the transportation system we will need to adequately meet the challenges this century presents us. And we’ll be healthier for it.
Well said! The lack of a national transit strategy is hurting our major metro areas and their economies right across the country.
There is a problem with this vision and that is the Constitution. The Constitution gives the power over municipal issues, land, and local public works to the provincial government:
92. In each Province the Legislature may exclusively make Laws in relation to Matters coming within the Classes of Subjects next hereinafter enumerated; that is to say,
8. Municipal Institutions in the Province.
10. Local Works and Undertakings [except]:
(a) Lines of Steam or other Ships, Railways, Canals, Telegraphs, and other Works and Undertakings connecting the Province with any other or others of the Provinces, or extending beyond the Limits of the Province:
(b) Lines of Steam Ships between the Province and any British or Foreign Country:
(c) Such Works as, although wholly situate within the Province, are before or after their Execution declared by the Parliament of Canada to be for the general Advantage of Canada or for the Advantage of Two or more of the Provinces.
13. Property and Civil Rights in the Province.
16. Generally all Matters of a merely local or private Nature in the Province.
As you can see it would be open to the federal government to declare under 10(c) that a particular bit of infrastructure, say the Expo Line, was for the general advantage of Canada. However, this is a rarely used power and has the potential to be very unpopular if things like the Site C Dam were also declared to be for the general advantage of Canada.
(It is certainly open under the Constitution for the provinces to agree to let the federal government to take a role, as in healthcare, or for the federal government to just contribute money to local projects like transit lines or the Olympics.)
The letter of the Constitution aside, there is also a logic to it that ought to be respected. There is talk about the need for a national housing strategy; however, there really isn’t a “national” housing issue. The housing issues across the country are quite different and much more amenable to local housing strategies. Mortgage finance is a national issue just because it makes up such a large part of the economy, but it is already under federal control for the most part.
Now the infrastructure problems that are apparent in cities across Canada – need for more rapid transit, lack of road pricing and the resulting congestion, unstable metro governance – are similar and are more amenable to a national strategy than housing, but there are local differences. Certainly I would welcome a national infrastructure strategy that recognized the importance of cities and their infrastructure and tried to coordinate federal efforts and federal funding of local projects, but that is probably as far as the feds can go.
(If we lived in a perfect world we would probably not have provinces but have a national government and then regional governments, but we don’t live in a perfect world and the institutional barriers to such a change would be massive.)
Let’s look more closely at TransLink’s performance. In 2009, I prepared a Media Resource Guide that examined all of the major questions, issues and performance metrics. It has not been updated since then, but the data is still useful. The guide is available online here: http://www.translink.ca/~/media/Documents/plans_and_projects/10_year_plan/annual_plans/media10yearplan/Resource%20Guide%202009%2010YP.ashx
Page 20 presents a then & now comparison of the transit system in 1999 vs 2009. Anyone who tries to mount a hate-on with the organization and its performance should be asked to explain their position in light of its results. My guess is that those who do have never read a quarterly performance report or cracked open an annual report. Those who may have looked at the books conveniently cherry pick certain metrics, having already come to a conclusion and simply needing anything to support it.
The current financial situation was born with decisions made by the old board of elected civic officials back in 2005. They set off an expansion cycle clearly knowing that it was not going to be financially sustainable (see pages 11 and 12 in the Guide). The fact that the system has been able to sustain almost all of that considerable expansion is evidence of some very sound and hard-nosed management over the past five years — more evidence of the true performance of the new board and the senior managers.
This leaves those promoting a TransLink hate-on relying only on the hope that the public never gets exposed to the facts of the organization’s accomplishments.
Unfortunately the public wouldn’t believe the truth it if hit them in the face. TransLink gets blamed for everything that’s wrong and never given credit for things going right. Repeat a lie enough times and it becomes fact.
A hour from now when the Minister has announced changes to TransLink governance the critics will be out in full force telling all who’ll listen that the changes will make things worse. It’s inevitable. Our mainstream media and their favourite sound bit generators are libertarians who believe taxation is evil and public services undesirable. They’re a bunch of uncaring, unCanadian people who should move to a Tea Party state where they can be surrounded by their own kind.
As I posted on Twitter (@257van) when the news came out:
“The pblm with @TransLink finding $ savings is that it implies TL still has room for efficiency: not true.”
I completely agree with Ken Hardie. Here’s Nathan Pachal’s take on this issue on his blog: http://sfb.nathanpachal.com/2013/04/tired-of-transit-bashing.html
Thank you for that link, Ken. Very informative. The TransLink organization has responded well to all the external noise, but that seems to be getting ignored.
I also found the huge operational efficiency aspects of SkyTrain very informative and well-referenced. I look forward to reading more.
This report is very well written and concise. It’s great to encounter a lack of gloss and fluff in a corporate report. The content and writing indicates that the public is getting good value for its money in TransLink.
Great job!