|
Post by WettCoast on Feb 21, 2012 12:54:44 GMT -8
Its budget day in BC today. By all accounts it will be an austerity budget, with the goal being to get the province back to having a 'balanced budget'. At the same time, BC's coastal ferry system is in need of a huge infusion of funds to allow, among other things, the vessel replacement program to move forward. So the question is: "Will there be increased funding (i.e. subsidies) and/or money marked specifically for new vessels? If not, BC Ferry Services is in serious trouble.
The BC Liberal government set this snowball in motion back in 2003. The ball is gaining weight & speed with each passing year. Will they try to stop the ball from an inevitable (if they do nothing) crash, or will they leave it up to the next government (after May of 2013) to deal with the mess?
|
|
|
Post by Low Light Mike on Feb 21, 2012 14:57:52 GMT -8
Its budget day in BC today. By all accounts it will be an austerity budget, with the goal being to get the province back to having a 'balanced budget'. At the same time, BC's coastal ferry system is in need of a huge infusion of funds to allow, among other things, the vessel replacement program to move forward. So the question is: "Will there be increased funding (i.e. subsidies) and/or money marked specifically for new vessels? If not, BC Ferry Services is in serious trouble. The F-word (Ferries) is not mentioned at all in the main budget documents, released this afternoon. ----------- Related to today's budget, here is the Ministry of Transportation's service-plan document for 2012/13 to 2014/15 (next 3 years) www.bcbudget.gov.bc.ca/2012/sp/pdf/ministry/tran.pdfFerry highlights in his service-plan document: Page-22 has a table of expense-levels for the next 3 years. - there is NO increase in spending for the "Public Transportation" category, which is the category that includes the operating subsidy for BCFS. - this confirms what Neil found, per the next post in this thread.
|
|
Neil
Voyager
Posts: 7,172
|
Post by Neil on Feb 21, 2012 15:02:23 GMT -8
Its budget day in BC today. By all accounts it will be an austerity budget, with the goal being to get the province back to having a 'balanced budget'. At the same time, BC's coastal ferry system is in need of a huge infusion of funds to allow, among other things, the vessel replacement program to move forward. So the question is: "Will there be increased funding (i.e. subsidies) and/or money marked specifically for new vessels? If not, BC Ferry Services is in serious trouble. The F-word (Ferries) is not mentioned at all in the main budget documents, released this afternoon. Related to today's budget, here is the Ministry of Transportation's service-plan document for 2012/13 to 2014/15 (next 3 years) www.bcbudget.gov.bc.ca/2012/sp/pdf/ministry/tran.pdfPage 157 of the budget indicates that this year's BC Ferries subsidy will be precisely the same as last year's. Bottom line: Let Premier Dix tend to the decay, and then blast him for spending too much money.
|
|
|
Post by WettCoast on Feb 21, 2012 17:40:16 GMT -8
So BCFS can expect no increased funding in the form of subsidies or 'new build' funding from government. They can also expect only minimal (if any) real increase from the fare box. Other revenue streams will likely produce little if any growth.
Net result:
* No contracts to be let for new builds at least until well after the next election * Probably no significant vessel (e.g. MLU) or terminal upgrades * bare bones maintenance - vessels that look like the Burnaby did a year ago will become the norm * Inability to raise money will force the company to cut expenses by what ever means possible
Servicing of the company's debt may sink the company if the status quo continues for much longer. Meanwhile, ferry dependant communities continue in their decline.
A fine mess to be sure!
|
|
|
Post by lmtengs on Feb 21, 2012 19:32:09 GMT -8
I can't count the number of times I've heard the 'ferries, not politics' excuse over the last 3 years... ;D
Come on, guys, get creative with standing up for yourselves, I like some evening entertainment!
|
|
mrdot
Voyager
Mr. DOT
Posts: 1,252
|
Post by mrdot on Feb 21, 2012 20:29:17 GMT -8
:)yes, indeed it's going to be difficult to stick to the shipwatchin, and not the mudslingin risky dix stuff over the next period, as our coastal ferry act/farce will unravel, and our fiscal difficulties continue. I was watching cnn american style dirty politics on the medical office monotur, and both parties claiming the christian moral high ground while flailing this nasty stuff, and thinking of ,my old sunday school tune, they'll know we are christians by our love! mrdot.
|
|
|
Post by Low Light Mike on Feb 21, 2012 21:02:35 GMT -8
American politics is a walk in the park compared to here. None of the Republican candidates and Obama himselfwouldn't last two weeks here in BC politics. Quite a few here wouldn't last either. It's not for the squishy hearted or weak kneed. Paul: When you say "quite a few here", are you talking about people on this forum? - Who are you calling "squishy hearted or weak kneed"? If you are referring to the people and attitudes that spoke-out against your post earlier this evening, then I think that this indicates that it's time to move on and say good-bye. But if I'm misunderstanding your comment, then please clarify.
|
|
Neil
Voyager
Posts: 7,172
|
Post by Neil on Feb 21, 2012 23:10:18 GMT -8
So BCFS can expect no increased funding in the form of subsidies or 'new build' funding from government. They can also expect only minimal (if any) real increase from the fare box. Other revenue streams will likely produce little if any growth. Net result: * No contracts to be let for new builds at least until well after the next election * Probably no significant vessel (e.g. MLU) or terminal upgrades * bare bones maintenance - vessels that look like the Burnaby did a year ago will become the norm * Inability to raise money will force the company to cut expenses by what ever means possible Servicing of the company's debt may sink the company if the status quo continues for much longer. Meanwhile, ferry dependant communities continue in their decline. A fine mess to be sure! David Hahn spelled out what was going to happen if the subsidy remained at its current level. BC Ferries may have no option other than to cut service on a number of routes and continue to raise fares, which will of course lead to a further downward spiral in ridership, and a sharpening of the public perception that riding ferries is just too expensive, so they'll vacation elsewhere. Yes, ferry dependent communities will suffer. Of course, Christy could always do one of her photo-ops, perhaps appearing heroically at Descanso Bay or some other ferry dock to announce an emergency injection of cash to benefit families in coastal communities. Might depend on what Liberal polling tells them about their chances in coastal ridings. The snowball did not start in 2003. It actually started in 1994 after the Spirit of Vancouver Island was completed. What started in 2003 was a scam that was unprecedented in BC; a politically motivated, ideological dodge that pretended a public utility like BC Ferries could not be run by government, and could work toward being self-supporting if set up as a private company. It ignored decades of evidence here and in Europe. It absolved a government of their responsibility to properly tend to transportation infrastructure for thousands of people in coastal communities. Now, virtually everyone- even the conservative, corporate media- understands it was nonsense, but unless something contradicts the figures in this budget, things are only going to get worse. Yes, government revenues are tight, and there is no funding to fix all the ills of BC Ferries, or to bring fares down. But there's also no honesty as of yet regarding the reality of the whole set up. Finally, another word to Mr Keenlyside. Despite the fact that your claim to intimate insight and experience on every facet of politics on either side of the border seems to grow with every post, if I ever go into politics, I think I am going to be really, really rash and decline to seek your sage advice on how to go about it. It'll probably ensure my loss, but there you have it.
|
|
|
Post by princessofvanfan on Feb 22, 2012 0:41:02 GMT -8
Well, maybe this will allow the Nanaimo and Burnaby to keep sailing for a little while longer than than expected.
|
|
|
Post by lmtengs on Feb 22, 2012 6:41:22 GMT -8
Well, maybe this will allow the Nanaimo and Burnaby to keep sailing for a little while longer than than expected. The question is, is this what we really want? Sure, the Nanny and Burn are vintage ships, but do we want to be keeping them in service as our primary choice to get from A to B? They're nearing the big 5-0, which is a huge milestone, especially for a ship. They're aging, and as you've seen the past few years, they're not performing as well as they used to either. Your call on if we should keep 'em or not, but sadly, from the economical point of view, I gotta say their useful lives are pretty well over. If they maintained them the way Black Ball maintains the Coho, well, then that would be a whooooolllle other story... but this isn't Black Ball, and this isn't the Coho either.
|
|
mrdot
Voyager
Mr. DOT
Posts: 1,252
|
Post by mrdot on Feb 22, 2012 10:53:32 GMT -8
:)if BC ferries had put half the effort that black ball has put into maintaining Coho, we could have much of Bennett's navy still in service, and think how much capital expendature could have been gained. There is much that could be learned by a gov't service looking at private practice, and even the way washington state has maintained their fleet of elderly veterens! :)mrdot.
|
|
|
Post by Northern Exploration on Feb 22, 2012 12:35:32 GMT -8
:)yes, indeed it's going to be difficult to stick to the shipwatchin, and not the mudslingin risky dix stuff over the next period, as our coastal ferry act/farce will unravel, and our fiscal difficulties continue. I was watching cnn american style dirty politics on the medical office monotur, and both parties claiming the christian moral high ground while flailing this nasty stuff, and thinking of ,my old sunday school tune, they'll know we are christians by our love! mrdot. American politics is a walk in the park compared to here. None of the Republican candidates and Obama himselfwouldn't last two weeks here in BC politics. Quite a few here wouldn't last either. It's not for the squishy hearted or weak kneed. I asked a former staff member of mine what her opinion of this was. She is the daughter of a former Minister of State and Deputy Minister in Ottawa, worked heavily in the Federal Leadership races of the Liberal Party, worked in Provincial politics and in government posts, and has run the campaigns for a bunch of provincial MPP's and federal MP's. Coincidently many of the Canadian politicals have been hiring US consultants to work on their election campaigns. In order to see them work first hand, she went to New England and worked in the last Obama Campaign. Her response was that while each region has its peculiarities, none compare to the sophistication, level of research and expenses burnt in political campaigns in the US. The amount paid to consultants is mind boggling. Running for Mayor in a large US city is a whole different ball of wax than any in Canada. Canadian voters are very different and the campaigns much more civilized. So she says she learned a lot, but has no desire to ever work elections in the US compared to her love of working Canadian elections. The mean spiritedness, intrusion on every aspect of the candidate on every level, the scrutiny, and basically no holds barred approach puts it much more on a warlike stance rather than a game of chess (her analogy).
|
|
mrdot
Voyager
Mr. DOT
Posts: 1,252
|
Post by mrdot on Feb 22, 2012 13:36:14 GMT -8
:)looking deeper, how can anyone involved in these hateful mudslinging campaigns claim to be on the same page as a christlike follower of any religious faith? as for being weakneed, perhaps it takes more courage to turn the other cheek, than to sling this political excrement! :)mrdot.
|
|
|
Post by Mike C on Feb 22, 2012 15:06:21 GMT -8
Mr Keenleyside: My dad was with Delta for a long time at City Hall, volunteering as the longest serving Parks and Recreation commissioner in the Corp of Delta. He saw first hand the ridiculous politics, on a municipal level, that one must go through to get things done. I study Urban Planning and Design, and also analyze municipal politics, and while I don't have experience, I do have knowledge of how things function. Your political rhetoric is hilarious. And your constant "now, back to ferries" is even better. Thank you. Well, maybe this will allow the Nanaimo and Burnaby to keep sailing for a little while longer than than expected. The question is, is this what we really want? Sure, the Nanny and Burn are vintage ships, but do we want to be keeping them in service as our primary choice to get from A to B? They're nearing the big 5-0, which is a huge milestone, especially for a ship. They're aging, and as you've seen the past few years, they're not performing as well as they used to either. Your call on if we should keep 'em or not, but sadly, from the economical point of view, I gotta say their useful lives are pretty well over. If they maintained them the way Black Ball maintains the Coho, well, then that would be a whooooolllle other story... but this isn't Black Ball, and this isn't the Coho either. This is important. Eventually, for all of us, there comes a point where we would rather see a ship be transformed into something functional and to serve another purpose, rather than sit (or sail) derelict or under-maintained. Neil mentioned in another thread that other parts of the world would consider us to be nearly a third-world system, with vessels aging well beyond the international standard. A vessel like the Queen of Oak Bay, built 31 years ago, we consider relatively new, while Europe would have that vessel waiting to be scrapped. The Pacific Northwest has a ferry infrastructure that is being pushed to the very limit, and the best example of that is in Washington State. We are on track for being the same situation, just with declining ridership and paying a lot more at the farebox.
|
|
mrdot
Voyager
Mr. DOT
Posts: 1,252
|
Post by mrdot on Feb 22, 2012 15:47:10 GMT -8
:)isn't it a small world, your dad and I must have crossed paths as I have retired from a 30 year municipal planning / clerks dep't with Delta municipality, that was my life after ferries, and the first years of QPR and several swartz bay vessels! those were my uvic university years. There was a year of teaching Jr. Hi., in Duncan, before my planning years. I have been absorbed in marine illustration and architectural graphic work for most of the remaining years of my working life! :)mrdot.
|
|
|
Post by DENelson83 on Feb 22, 2012 19:27:13 GMT -8
It's clear that the only way I'm going to be pleased with an overarching action by BCF is if that action is cutting fares at least 50 percent on all routes.
|
|
Neil
Voyager
Posts: 7,172
|
Post by Neil on Feb 22, 2012 19:55:40 GMT -8
It's clear that the only way I'm going to be pleased with an overarching action by BCF is if that action is cutting fares at least 50 percent on all routes. Which will be paid for... how, exactly? Assuming that your suggestion was serious. Surely you can give us more than one sentence.
|
|
|
Post by Scott on Feb 22, 2012 20:17:20 GMT -8
It's clear that the only way I'm going to be pleased with an overarching action by BCF is if that action is cutting fares at least 50 percent on all routes. BC Ferries can't do that without cutting service by more than 50 percent. The only way they could possibly cut fares without cutting service would be if the provincial government decided to pour more money into the subsidy BC Ferries receives. And even with more money, what's the priority? New ferries or lower fares? But if we take our ferry hats off for a minute, you have to ask where the money is going to come from. The education system is crying for more money, the judicial system is failing, health costs keep going up with an aging population, people want more buses and expanded skytrain... and of course many people want lower ferry fares and renewed ferry system. But most people don't want higher taxes... and our current government takes pride in the fact that we have some of the lowest taxes in North America. Maybe I'm being too simplistic about how the government can raise money. Maybe some people think we shoud run a defecit and pay for these things later. Maybe in a couple years the economy will improve or the price of natural gas will go up and the government will have more money in its coffers. But even when that happens, I doubt BC Ferries will be the priority.
|
|
|
Post by DENelson83 on Feb 22, 2012 20:27:34 GMT -8
Well then, we have a tradeoff. Either the BC government and/or its taxpayers have to contribute more, or just the ferry users will have to contribute more. And the higher those fares go, the fewer people will use those ferries, and the positive feedback loop will continue. And one of the possible (even if not probable) endgame scenarios of this positive feedback loop will be the separation of Vancouver Island from British Columbia, and Canada will end up with eleven provinces instead of just ten.
|
|
|
Post by Scott on Feb 22, 2012 20:36:55 GMT -8
As it stands right now, ferry service to Vancouver Island is more or less sustainable in terms of covering costs and making enough profit that can pay for new ships.
It's the smaller routes and the northern routes that are losing money and need either higher subsidies or cuts in service if fares are to be lowered.
|
|
|
Post by lmtengs on Feb 22, 2012 20:47:16 GMT -8
Well then, we have a tradeoff. Either the BC government and/or its taxpayers have to contribute more, or just the ferry users will have to contribute more. And the higher those fares go, the fewer people will use those ferries, and the positive feedback loop will continue. And one of the possible (even if not probable) endgame scenarios of this positive feedback loop will be the separation of Vancouver Island from British Columbia, and Canada will end up with eleven provinces instead of just ten. I dare you to try telling BC citizens to pay higher taxes. No offense intended, but it's a trending truth that most of BC's residents are a bunch of hypocritical nuts who want everything for nothing. Now come the next election, they'll vote NDP, hoping that the new government can solve the situation. Don't people realize that, just like you can't buy a new Lamborghini on a $70,000 per year salary, the government isn't able to offer us decent kicks for living here with a 'salary' as low as it's getting?? The numbskulls people are... makes me want to move to Norway. Sure, they have the highest cost of living in the World, but at least they know what they're doing. People realize that you gotta pay for happiness. Money can't buy happiness? bulls&%$. Cowpoop.
|
|
|
Post by DENelson83 on Feb 22, 2012 20:54:18 GMT -8
Don't people realize that, just like you can't buy a new Lamborghini on a $70,000 per year salary, the government isn't able to offer us decent kicks for living here with a 'salary' as low as it's getting?? Then don't buy Lamborghinis. Don't pay your top brass million-dollar salaries. If they're not willing to accept anything less, replace them. Our society is being destroyed by blatant Mammon. Why do you think people are starting to rise up against the "1%"? And we're even starting to hear stories that even the total assets of the "1%" won't get us out of this mess.
|
|
|
Post by lmtengs on Feb 22, 2012 21:03:31 GMT -8
Don't people realize that, just like you can't buy a new Lamborghini on a $70,000 per year salary, the government isn't able to offer us decent kicks for living here with a 'salary' as low as it's getting?? Then don't buy Lamborghinis. Don't pay your top brass million-dollar salaries. If they're not willing to accept anything less, replace them. Our society is being destroyed by blatant Mammon. Why do you think people are starting to rise up against the "1%"? And we're even starting to hear stories that even the total assets of the "1%" won't get us out of this mess. ... Notice the quoting of the word government 'salary' in my previous post. It's a metaphor for our tax money being paid to the government, which isn't nearly enough for us to get what we need, ie. education, healthcare, transportation/infrastructure, recreation, etc... Yes, the blokes in Govy are making too much money, but that's not what I was getting at.
|
|
|
Post by DENelson83 on Feb 22, 2012 21:07:32 GMT -8
Yep, it's clear that this "we want something for nothing" way of thinking is only resulting in one impasse after another. Sooner or later, something has to give, and I don't know what it's going to be.
|
|
mrdot
Voyager
Mr. DOT
Posts: 1,252
|
Post by mrdot on Feb 22, 2012 21:34:47 GMT -8
:)well folks, maybe the govy needs a chevy rather than lamborgini! perhaps we need to re-focus on the good old fashoned steel ferry that we could build here at home! :)mrdot.
|
|