|
Post by markkarj on Sept 15, 2007 5:32:40 GMT -8
www.canada.com/vancouversun/news/story.html?id=a93d3657-1a09-4f4c-a77a-408b931c586d&k=57581---- I think they intended to say the Northern Expedition replacing the Queen of Prince Rupert. Confirmation that the Tsawassen and Esquimalt will become scrap metal after a long journey (I wonder about the QPR). ---- BC Ferries to hike fares up to 25 per cent Jeff Lee, Vancouver Sun Published: Saturday, September 15, 2007 BC Ferries travellers will see fare hikes of up to 25 per cent on some routes over the next four years, company president David Hahn said Friday. The biggest increases will be on the government-subsidized "minor routes" operated by BC Ferries, while users of the major routes between the Lower Mainland and Vancouver Island will see increases of up to 15.5 per cent. The hikes were conditionally approved by the BC Ferries Commission in the spring, but were subject to review by both the provincial government and the ferry corporation. On Friday, Hahn said the province has indicated it won't increase the baseline subsidy it pays for the minor routes, so he now expects BC Ferries commissioner Martin Crilly to approve the price increases set in the spring. Crilly must issue his report by Sept. 30. The first of the four-year rate hikes would go into effect on April 1, 2008. "I don't think anybody wants price increases," Hahn said. "But the fact remains we have a very big system that was allowed to deteriorate for a very long period of time. We can't sail ships that are unsafe, we can't stop fixing the terminal structures that were allowed to deteriorate and we can't have computer information systems that are behind the times. It's not a good answer, but these are required expenditures." In April, Crilly set a "preliminary price cap" for various routes for a four-year term ending in 2012. For the three non-subsidized Strait of Georgia routes between Vancouver Island and the mainland, he allowed a 5.4-per-cent increase in the first year, and two per cent with an inflation factor for each of the remaining three years. The rates effectively amount to about 15.5 per cent over the life of the contract, Hahn said. Crilly also set an initial cap of 3.6 per cent in the first year on all other routes (which are government-subsidized) and annual increases amounting to about 6.5 per cent in the remaining three years. Hahn said the increases, along with fuel surcharges, could see ferry rates rise by up to 25 per cent by 2012. The province will pay BC Ferries $108 million this year in service fees for the minor routes, which include all of the northern routes as well as the Gulf Islands, Sunshine Coast and inter-island services. The money, which is in effect a subsidy to keep BC Ferries operating on routes that don't break even, is tied to specific vessels. Crilly's report indicates the service fee will increase to $124.7 million by 2012, reflecting terminal upgrades and new vessels being placed in service. For example, when the Northern Adventure replaces the Queen of Prince Rupert in 2009, the fee will increase. It will also go up when a new 125-car ferry being built in North Vancouver replaces the Queen of Tsawwassen, the oldest ship in the fleet. Hahn said both the Tsawwassen and the Queen of Esquimalt will be sent to ship breakers in Turkey. Hahn's comments came at a news conference where he unveiled larger-than-life graphics celebrating the 2010 Winter Olympics that will adorn two more of the new Super C Class ferries being built at a shipyard in Flensburg, Germany. Earlier this year, BC Ferries unveiled a graphic that will be put on the first of three ferries, Coastal Renaissance, as part of a $2.5-million campaign to advertise the Olympics. Hahn said the promotion will help entice visitors to B.C. before and after the Olympics. The three ferries will cost $542 million to build, and all will operate on major routes to Vancouver Island. The cost of the Olympic promotion includes a West Coast-style barbecue for 3,000 at the German shipyard on Sept. 21, which Hahn said was a thank-you to construction workers and their families.
|
|
|
Post by ferryking on Sept 15, 2007 11:37:00 GMT -8
markkarj, I wonder if BCF meant, when the Northern Adventure takes over the QPR's current route, as i think these funds are not only ship specific but route must be a factor too. but you may be right, it could just be a 'typo'. interesting...that with monies being provided when new ships enter service...that there isn't more of a push to get the new intermediate ferry built and in service...so they can start collecting the funds. fk
|
|
|
Post by Scott on Sept 15, 2007 12:52:17 GMT -8
Hahn said something about the ships being environmentally scrapped yesterday on Bill Good's show on CKNW. I didn't catch the whole interview so I didn't get what specific ships he was talking about.
|
|
|
Post by Mac Write on Sept 15, 2007 13:50:14 GMT -8
I thought during the AGM he said the Esquimalt and Tswassen were going to Turkey but not to be scrapped.
|
|
|
Post by markkarj on Sept 15, 2007 15:07:41 GMT -8
I thought during the AGM he said the Esquimalt and Tswassen were going to Turkey but not to be scrapped. I kinda doubt it. I wonder what Turkish company would want 45 and 50 year old ships like ours, when they could probably find newer and more readily available ones from Northern European companies looking to offload their used ships.
|
|
|
Post by WettCoast on Sept 15, 2007 16:13:41 GMT -8
So it seems that BCFS's is intent on having as much work as possible sent overseas. BC ship yards and workers will not be building new ships. Nor will they will they be scrapping the old ones. Oh well, at least they will get some work building little ferries and also refit & repair work.
One other question - What vessel is BCFS's planning to use to cover for the Queen's of Nanaimo, Burnaby & I Class (Jervis Inlet) when those vessels are in refit? An old V?
Also, it seems the Tsawwassen will not be around for the 50th anniversary, nor will it be used as a training vessel or museum. BCFS's does not seem to have much interest in their pre-2003 history.
|
|
Neil
Voyager
Posts: 7,172
|
Post by Neil on Sept 15, 2007 16:33:16 GMT -8
The Queen of Burnaby could cover for the 'Nanaimo, and you've still got the I and the 'Chilliwack for the Powell River area. At least until they retire the 'wack.
|
|
|
Post by Retrovision on Sept 15, 2007 16:47:09 GMT -8
The Queen of Burnaby could cover for the 'Nanaimo, and you've still got the I and the 'Chilliwack for the Powell River area. At least until they retire the 'wack. Place the 'Wack on Little River / Comox - Westview / Powell River, or contract out the route? It's interesting to know that past studies have pinned the ' Nanaimo as the worse-off of the two unlifted 'B' sisters, and yet BCFS put less money into the recent major upgrade of the ' Burnaby.
|
|
|
Post by markkarj on Sept 16, 2007 11:14:50 GMT -8
So it seems that BCFS's is intent on having as much work as possible sent overseas. BC ship yards and workers will not be building new ships. Nor will they will they be scrapping the old ones. Oh well, at least they will get some work building little ferries and also refit & repair work. Do we have any shipbreakers in Canada capable of dealing with these ships? Also, in terms of building new ships, how do BC's yards compare to others say on the East Coast in terms of building ships the size of the Super-C class?
|
|
|
Post by Curtis on Sept 16, 2007 21:15:01 GMT -8
I thought during the AGM he said the Esquimalt and Tswassen were going to Turkey but not to be scrapped. I Believe That's the way Hahn said it, Though I Could have Mis-Read Him... But the Way he said it makes me think that they still will be used as Ferries. What Happened to this Quote By Our Own Admin, Who Got it From an Esquimalt Crew Member, Who Probaby Got it From Some Type of Source He confirmed what has been mentioned on this forum already - that the Esquimalt will be on Route 30 for 4 months and then be sent off to Turkey. He told me it wasn't going there for scrap, however, but to continue to be used as a ferry. I Hope they'll Still Be Used as Ferries, Their Spirit Should Live On Somehow, Just Don't End their Life.
|
|
|
Post by Scott on Sept 16, 2007 22:27:56 GMT -8
It will be interesting to see which story turns out to be correct:) All I can say is the crew member I talked to seemed to know what he was talking about. I wish I was a little more educated on a crew member's ranking by his dress or patches. All I remember was he had a white shirt on and was on the car deck... so I'm assuming he was a little higher than a deckhand. But I don't know where the crew members get their information from either, so don't "go to the bank" on my story:)
|
|
|
Post by Retrovision on Sept 16, 2007 22:42:33 GMT -8
I don't know where the crew members get their information from either, so don't "go to the bank" on my story:) But I just went to the UK's Bank of the Rock to cash in my 401(K) based on this tip! Now you've done it (No worries all, probably only fans of the BBC, etc, will get this one about a Pottersville / It's a Wonderful Life-esque bank story from accross the pond and a continent) We're of course thankful for any info given by crew, with whatever level of reliability; thanks anyways, John.
|
|
|
Post by queenofcowichan on Sept 17, 2007 12:22:39 GMT -8
IT is my understanding that no Canadian registerd ship can be taken out of the country for scrap. But what happens is a buyer transfers the ships registry to another country Such as Panama In the Queen of Victoria's case and they are no longer bound that.
Somewheres on the East Coast of Canada there is a Enviromentaly safe Shipbreaking Yard.
(As so it was said on a shipbreaking special on TV not too long ago)
IMPORTANT NOTE:
IT IS AGAINST THE LAW FOR A CANADIAN REGISTERD SHIP TO BE SENT TO SHIPBREAKERS WHO ARE NOT ENVIROMENTALY SAFE.
|
|
|
Post by Political Incorrectness on Sept 17, 2007 16:56:06 GMT -8
queenofcowichan, what specific law on the books prohibits this?
|
|
Neil
Voyager
Posts: 7,172
|
Post by Neil on Sept 17, 2007 18:55:24 GMT -8
Yeah, I'll second that question. Sources, please?
Canada is a member of the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development. The OECD requires that ships from member nations not be sent anywhere for ship-breaking without first being stripped of contaminants, unless they first get an okay from the country the boat is destined for. Former PM Paul Martin was excoriated for allowing Canadian Shipping Lines, a company he owned, send a contaminated ship to Turkey, but there was no prosecution.
Canada does not do inspections of foreign ship breaking yards, and it would be interesting to hear of any laws which could possibly govern which overseas boneyard old ships end up at.
|
|
|
Post by Retrovision on Sept 17, 2007 21:09:26 GMT -8
While on the topic - close enough I hope - Canada is also party to the MARPOL agreement, to prevent ship pollution... en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MARPOL
|
|
|
Post by Low Light Mike on Sept 19, 2007 11:41:59 GMT -8
Re the fare-increases over the next 4 years: Here's some quotes from Kevin Falcon, from CKNW.com. - remember that Mr. Falcon is the BC Cabinet Minister who has de-facto control over BC Ferries. He also has the political gift for quotable-quotes. ;D ================================== www.cknw.com/news/news_local.cfm?cat=7428109912&rem=75027&red=80110923aPBIny&wids=242&gi=1&gm=news_local.cfmVANCOUVER/CKNW(AM980) - Transportation Minister Kevin Falcon says some perspective is needed when criticizing a 25% fare hike over four years approved this week by the ferry commissioner. "While I recognize the increases of 4 to 6 % in a year, people would rather not pay them, I totally understand the frustration of having to pay anything, I think when we recognize the improvements being made, the fact the corporation is being run a lot more efficiently and smartly, that it's not an unreasonable tradeoff" =======================
|
|
Mill Bay
Voyager
Long Suffering Bosun
Posts: 2,886
|
Post by Mill Bay on Sept 19, 2007 12:53:02 GMT -8
While I recognize the increases of 4 to 6 % in a year, people would rather not pay them, I totally understand the frustration of having to pay anything, I think when we recognize the improvements being made, the fact the corporation is being run a lot more efficiently and smartly, that it's not an unreasonable tradeoff" ======================= That sounds like the same logic David Hahn used to explain how our ferry fare rates are comparable to or even cheaper than ferry travel in most other countries in the world. Never mind the fact that in Europe, most ferry voyages are a lot longer and you get a lot more amenities on the ship while you're on board. Mile for mile, for a short 90 minute crossing, vs a 9 hour crossing for a similar price, the price paid to get from Tsawassen to Victoria is probably more expensive per mile than those other countries in the world he was using as reference.
|
|
Neil
Voyager
Posts: 7,172
|
Post by Neil on Sept 19, 2007 13:40:04 GMT -8
Just checked:
Dover to Calais, on P&O, 90 minute crossing- leaving Sunday morning, returning Monday evening: $175, car and two adults. Although sometimes there are deals for considerably cheaper.
Tsawwassen to Swartz Bay, 95 minute crossing, same details: $123.
Some of the Scottish domestic routes on Caledonian MacBrayne are also very expensive compared to ours.
It's a complicated argument, and there are examples of us being both cheaper and more expensive.
|
|
|
Post by Retrovision on Sept 19, 2007 19:20:09 GMT -8
It's a complicated argument, and there are examples of us being both cheaper and more expensive. Connecting a peripheral island of the second largest land mass on earth for a country is quite a different thing than connecting the UK to the European continent, I would argue.
|
|
|
Post by Low Light Mike on Sept 19, 2007 19:40:07 GMT -8
Connecting a peripheral island of the second largest land mass on earth for a country is quite a different thing than connecting the UK to the European continent, I would argue. In what ways? - Obviously your point is true that the political-geography is different, but the "natural geography" is similar in size-of-crossing, but maybe the English Channel has rougher weather?
|
|
Nick
Voyager
Chief Engineer - Queen of Richmond
Posts: 2,078
|
Post by Nick on Sept 19, 2007 19:55:03 GMT -8
I think Retro means economically linked. Yes, Britain and it's across-channel neighbours are vital to each other economically, I doubt they are so dependent as much as Vancouver Island is to the mainland. According to the disaster planning groups here, after 1 week of no ferry service, every grocery store on the island will be out of food. I remember with the 4-day strike a few years ago the stores were running low. That is just one example of the commodities that are ferry-dependent. I don't think that Britain's economy is that dependent on ferry service.
I think that English Channel ferry services are more of a tourist/travel route than trade route.
|
|
|
Post by Ferryman on Sept 19, 2007 20:31:39 GMT -8
I have some guests visiting us from England at the moment, and they're here to drive some of the scenic routes our provice, and the Pacific Northwest has to offer below the border for 2 weeks. I took them on a voyage on the Queen of Cowichan to Nanaimo, and returned on the Queen of Vancouver from Victoria. They were absolutely amazed with the ships, and thought the fares were extremely cheap. I had to laugh when they asked me if the Cowichan was a brand new ship of ours. Every price they look into, automatically goes through the conversion to English Pounds in their mind, which turns out to be half ($5.00 = 2.50 pounds). They tend to look at their holiday over here as a relatively cheap one in some respects. I remember someone saying that flights are cheaper than most Ferry Fares over in Europe. Europe pays double or more than what we pay for fuel, which is why most people over there drive Diesels.
This Monday they took the Cowichan over to the Island again, and then headed South over the border via the Coho, and then driving down to Portland, Oregon. I look forward to their comments when they return back here on Friday.
|
|
Neil
Voyager
Posts: 7,172
|
Post by Neil on Sept 19, 2007 21:20:45 GMT -8
[Connecting a peripheral island of the second largest land mass on earth for a country is quite a different thing than connecting the UK to the European continent, I would argue. Mill Bay was raising a point of comparative costs for journeys of given lengths, and that was what I was addressing. 'Peripheral islands' and 'second largest land masses on earth' notwithstanding. Coxnnick: Check out the commercial component on English Channel crossings, and the dedicated freight ferries that also ply the waters. There's a tremendous amount of ferry-borne commerce there- it might not be so different from what we have here.
|
|
|
Post by Retrovision on Sept 20, 2007 11:29:52 GMT -8
It's a complicated argument, and there are examples of us being both cheaper and more expensive. Connecting a peripheral island of the second largest land mass on earth for a country is quite a different thing than connecting the UK to the European continent, I would argue. Mill Bay was raising a point of comparative costs for journeys of given lengths, and that was what I was addressing. 'Peripheral islands' and 'second largest land masses on earth' notwithstanding. I assume that a link that connects a continent to the UK and a link that simply connects the mainland of a massive country to another far smaller part of it have very different impacts on the economy overall and would suggest that might be reason enough for a lack of comparison of fares. How can our ferry link be compared in fares, etc., to one that connects the entire UK to the rest of that hemisphere when a more apt comparison would be between, say, the Maritimes and PEI? As you know, Neil, quotes can be used as jumping-off points for duscussion even if they aren't addressing the specific quote. There's a tremendous amount of ferry-borne commerce there- it might not be so different from what we have here. Sounds like an argument defeating itself. Yes, there is a tremendous ammount of ferry-borne commerce there, as well a tremendous ammount of ferries, routes and companies, along with dedicated freight vessels and a lot more competition. Comapring the two markets would be like comparing communism and capitalism I'd argue, in that we live in a captive market near-monopoly (only because of the few freight-only services offered and for no other reason is this not a full-fledged monopoly here) and the UK has an abundance of providers, routes and vessels.
|
|