Neil
Voyager
Posts: 7,192
|
Post by Neil on Jan 2, 2015 22:08:46 GMT -8
Mr Horn, I really like to keep away from Todd Stone stories, as anything that comes out of this clod's mouth darkens my day. However, like a bad car crash, you can never avoid looking, despite your better instincts.
Stone's latest pronouncement that he is 'frustrated' that the current BC Ferries structure doesn't allow him to take a hatchet to management costs triggered the usual gag reflex. The inept state of today's corporate journalism apparently precluded the possibility of the reporter reminding him that it was, precisely, his government's actions that set BC Ferries up as they are, with their (snicker) independence from ministerial diktat.
There seems to be little doubt that bloated management is part of BC Ferries' problem. There is little doubt, also, that Stone and the rest of the disreputable Liberal bunch are holding on for dear life to this bit of logistical flotsam, lest they be finally swamped by the inevitable results of their own policies regarding ferries and their affordability.
Anyway. A mea culpa, to finish off for now.
I maintained several years ago that BC Ferries was 'privatized' as a sort of dogmatic statement by Gordon Campbell and crew that the private sector model is always preferable to enterprise by government. I was wrong, as I've learned over the last year or so. The real reason for the change, as alluded to by Mr Horn, above, was to slice off government debt relating to ferries, and put it on a 'private' company's books. And that is the main reason the Liberals won't fold BC Ferries back into the transportation ministry. I gave Campbell too much credit when I assumed he was motivated by free enterprise 'ethics'.
In fact, he was motivated by nothing more than phony book keeping.
Maybe we should shed a tear for poor Todd, hamstrung as he is by his own government's financial management.
Naah.
|
|
|
Post by WettCoast on Jan 2, 2015 22:24:32 GMT -8
A simple 'like' is not enough to show my wholehearted agreement with what you have written, Neil. Especially this part: Thank you!
|
|
|
Post by Scott on Jan 3, 2015 10:04:19 GMT -8
Agree with Neil 100%. I can't understand how these MLAs and cabinet ministers can talk so lightly about employee vacation plans and travel passes without looking in the mirror. But what I wanted to highlight was this little gem (above) in the middle of the article. I do hope the LNG conversions go well and help Route 1 make an even larger profit than it does already... but if it's a giant boondoggle of a project... I expect Minister Stone to own it 100%. - John H
|
|
Neil
Voyager
Posts: 7,192
|
Post by Neil on Jan 9, 2015 22:14:30 GMT -8
|
|
|
Post by Low Light Mike on Mar 4, 2015 11:06:11 GMT -8
If you follow BC Ferries stories in the news media, you'll be hearing lots about "Price Caps" in the next month. Price Caps are the maximum fare increases that will be allowed for the next 4-year term, starting April 2016. The BC Ferry Commissioner will release his preliminary amounts for route-group price-caps by March 31, 2015. Following this, there will be a 6 month period for BC Ferries, the Provincial Government and the public to weigh in on the Commissioner's figures. Then it all is supposed to be finalized by end of September 2015. Expect to see lots of sparring between CEO Corrigan and Minister Stone during those 6 months. Here's a good news report on the process, from Powell River Peak: from HERE
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 4, 2015 12:17:02 GMT -8
Thanks for posting this, Mr. Horn. I love that line out of the PR Peak article which I've bolded. When you have BC Ferries and the Province saying the role of the Commission is to "balance" the needs of users & the company, but the commissioner himself says his job is to worry about the needs of the company, you have to wonder. It's worth noting that the Commission has almost never said "no" to BC Ferries' requests. Expect more 4% increases in the coming years. If not, I will be pleasantly surprised. If you follow BC Ferries stories in the news media, you'll be hearing lots about "Price Caps" in the next month. Expect to see lots of sparring between CEO Corrigan and Minister Stone during those 6 months. Here's a good news report on the process, from Powell River Peak: from HERE
|
|
|
Post by Low Light Mike on Mar 18, 2015 8:29:30 GMT -8
The BC Ferry Commissioner is supposed to release his preliminary Price-Cap amounts for the upcoming Term #4, today.
If they are too high of a fare increase, then the Minister will likely instruct BC Ferries to lower their costs.
The Minister's comments, at a breakfast meeting today, were that he expects that the price-caps will be an improvement over previous ones. ie. less of an increase, that likely is closer to an actual economic inflation factor.
But if they're not low enough, expect some more push-&-shove between the Minister and the BCFerries CEO.
....stay tuned.
|
|
|
Post by Low Light Mike on Mar 18, 2015 9:02:03 GMT -8
...and here they are: 1.9% for each year of the termThe news release from HERE
|
|
|
Post by Low Light Mike on Mar 18, 2015 9:14:09 GMT -8
The various detail documents, re the Term #4 preliminary price-cap decision: ============= The commissioner's decision document (51 pages) HERE--------- PWC consultant's assessment of BC Ferries' submission (33 pages) HERE------------ PWC consultant performance reviews of BC Ferries: - Efficiency (31 pages) HERE- Fuel Management (25 pages) HERE- Home-Porting Arrangements (21 pages) HERE- BC Ferries Vacations (17 pages) HERE=============== I won't be commenting on these items, until I find time to read these reports. But it sounds like there will be plenty of interesting items in these reports. I'm particularly interested in the home-porting report, because that's an issue that impacts placement of ships on routes, and the schedule of routes. ....the kind of thing that I'm most interested in.
|
|
|
Post by Low Light Mike on Mar 18, 2015 19:32:27 GMT -8
From Page 14 of the Ferry Commissioner's decision document:
- bold items are my emphasis.
I still contend that there will eventually be a reduction of sailings on Route-2, in order to move more traffic to Tsawwassen.
|
|
|
Post by Kahn_C on Mar 18, 2015 19:51:27 GMT -8
The thing there that caught my eye was "Horseshoe Bay and Nanaimo" not "Horseshoe Bay and Departure Bay". Tin foil hat time, but I wonder what difference reducing Nanaimo's 3 terminals down to 1 might do to the capital plan accounting...
|
|
|
Post by Scott on Mar 18, 2015 21:17:10 GMT -8
I won't be commenting on these items, until I find time to read these reports. But it sounds like there will be plenty of interesting items in these reports. I'm particularly interested in the home-porting report, because that's an issue that impacts placement of ships on routes, and the schedule of routes. ....the kind of thing that I'm most interested in. I won't ruin the surprise, but this might make news on Saltspring Island. Of course, this is all in the "study phase", but it's interesting (and educational for me) to see how crewing some of the more remote routes is a problem for BC Ferries and leads to extra costs. - John H
|
|
|
Post by roeco on Mar 19, 2015 7:01:51 GMT -8
From Page 14 of the Ferry Commissioner's decision document: - bold items are my emphasis. I still contend that there will eventually be a reduction of sailings on Route-2, in order to move more traffic to Tsawwassen.
|
|
|
Post by roeco on Mar 19, 2015 7:05:50 GMT -8
I would think consolidating all Nanaimo routes at Departure Bay would be the best option...as it would need very little if any work to do so, Duke Point lands must be worth a small fortune which could be used to help upgrade Horseshoe Bay terminal. As theirs No two ways about it Horseshoe Bay HAS to be upgraded..cause u sure cant Move Bowen Island or Langdale routes.
|
|
|
Post by Dane on Apr 6, 2015 19:36:15 GMT -8
I was not too sure where to post this, but here is a 2008 interview where the now-Premier goes at the Government for the Coastal Ferry Act ->
This link was posted on the Fairness for Coastal Communities Facebook page tonight, so I cannot take credit for finding it.
The reason I chose this thread to post it is simple (other than the fact that it is recently-active), I think the 2016 changes to the Coastal Ferry Act have the chance to make changes of significance that will be difficult to undue. At this point, other than legalize around the private company, there are not actually a lot of very substantive changes in the way BC Ferries works in general. Fares are high, but are basically charged the same way. Sailings are cut, but contracts for crews have not been changed in a way that will make adding sailing back difficult.
Changes in fare structure (advance payment), and next time the unions go into negotiations, I believe, could be the start of a substantial unwinding of the current system.
Hopefully I am being cynical.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 7, 2015 21:33:51 GMT -8
The reason I chose this thread to post it is simple (other than the fact that it is recently-active), I think the 2016 changes to the Coastal Ferry Act have the chance to make changes of significance that will be difficult to undue. At this point, other than legalize around the private company, there are not actually a lot of very substantive changes in the way BC Ferries works in general. Fares are high, but are basically charged the same way. Sailings are cut, but contracts for crews have not been changed in a way that will make adding sailing back difficult. Changes in fare structure (advance payment), and next time the unions go into negotiations, I believe, could be the start of a substantial unwinding of the current system. Hopefully I am being cynical. I think the Union Negotiations will present a good opportunity to put a cap on ferry worker salary increases, making Todd's 1.9% even smaller. Disclaimer, before I get thrown to the wolves: I do NOT think that ferry workers are overpaid, but for the sake of fares, the salary increases themselves could be slowed down. Even just a cut in the food discount (and no change to salary structure) would help.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 21, 2015 15:04:12 GMT -8
|
|
|
Post by Dane on May 21, 2015 15:43:11 GMT -8
I didn't see that coming in a million years. Curious to see which sailings are actually restored?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 21, 2015 16:00:33 GMT -8
I didn't see that coming in a million years. Curious to see which sailings are actually restored? Unfortunately they aren't reinstating any sailings. This article basically says they are going to find 4.9 million sav ings tasked by the province, elsewhere, rather than cutting even more. The cuts, had they gone ahead, were going to be implemented in Winter 2015/16.
|
|
|
Post by Low Light Mike on May 21, 2015 16:35:44 GMT -8
I didn't see that coming in a million years. Curious to see which sailings are actually restored? Unfortunately they aren't reinstating any sailings. This article basically says they are going to find 4.9 million sav ings tasked by the province, elsewhere, rather than cutting even more. The cuts, had they gone ahead, were going to be implemented in Winter 2015/16. Just so we're all clear: This is about major route sailings, not the minor routes. As Deck Cadet said, all they are doing is saying that the not-yet-cut sailings won't actually be cut. An analogy: I had previously stated that I was going to take $10 from your wallet next month, but now I've announced that I won't be doing that. Perhaps you could say those sailings were half-cut...
|
|
|
Post by Dane on May 21, 2015 16:44:46 GMT -8
Gotcha that's definitely not what I took out of the CBC article. So no hope for a 7pm route two sailing? Darn that cut actually effected me a bit.
|
|
|
Post by hwy19man on May 21, 2015 19:18:21 GMT -8
|
|
Neil
Voyager
Posts: 7,192
|
Post by Neil on May 21, 2015 21:31:24 GMT -8
The announcement of no cuts to major routes is a rare bit of good news... and perhaps an even rarer bit of common sense. Cut service, and revenue might drop? Gosh... who knew?
I notice that Deborah Marshall states that the jury is still out on whether cuts to the lifeline routes has resulted in the expected 'savings'. Stephen Hume's stellar reporting makes it clear that in terms of economic activity in coastal communities and resulting taxation revenue to the province the cuts have been negative, but the results to BC Ferries' bottom line might be less clear.
This is sort of a hodge-podge thread, and it seems to me that this part of the discussion might be better off in a more specific venue.
|
|
|
Post by Low Light Mike on May 21, 2015 21:36:08 GMT -8
This is sort of a hodge-podge thread, and it seems to me that this part of the discussion might be better off in a more specific venue. Good idea. This is moved to the PT#4 thread, because those cost savings, no matter how they are achieved, are for the next performance term.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 21, 2015 12:14:28 GMT -8
In the 2015-2016 business plan: -Applications to the commissioner will be made in fiscal 2016 for the replacement of the Bowen Class vessels, and the replacement for the NIP.
-They will conclude replacement strategies in fiscal 2016 for the replacement of the C Class.
-Gross revenue is expected to be 3.9% higher versus fiscal 2015.
|
|