|
Post by Retrovision on Jan 31, 2008 23:15:21 GMT -8
Much belated, apologies, but welcome to our humble forum, Gregg, and I'm looking forward to not only your contributions but also the strength that our two organizations can add to eachother. Consider this permission to use any of my published pics (such as at for the SOF website; I'm sure we'll talk further through Private Message or Email about details, but consider this carte blanche to put any of my photos on your site if you need to with short notice. Thanks for officially joining us and we look forward to more from you and your organization.
|
|
|
Post by Ferryman on Feb 1, 2008 7:30:09 GMT -8
Seeming I donated some of my photos for the website, I was given a sneak peak this morning before it will be released to the public. I must say, that I'm extremely impressed with this revamped website. I think it makes some very clear points, with lots of information. When it's open for the public, I think everyone on here will be impressed as well.
Many thanks to Gregg and his team. Keep up the good work!
Cheers,
-Chris
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 4, 2008 13:18:34 GMT -8
Hello all, Well the www.saveourferries.com is now live, I hope you enjoy it. This represents five years worth of work, and Capt. Clements and I figure it only contains 5% of the information that we have. I will try to come on as much as possible, but as the key contact for SOF my life is very busy. The crew of the Queen of Nanaimo on my watch, think it is great that you are here and you should identify yourselves if you travel with us. You will probably now get a lot of Ferry Workers coming to the site on a regular basis, since we linked it to ours. Everyone take care, and I hope I get a chance to meet some of you when we go on tour in March. Gregg
|
|
|
Post by Scott on Feb 4, 2008 16:13:21 GMT -8
Wow, lots of information to look through. Looks very nice! Thanks for taking the time to let us know about it and welcome us to view it. I know everyone on this forum won't agree with everything that's on there, but there's some good stuff on there for anyone who's interested in BC Ferries and ths history of our coast.
|
|
|
Post by Low Light Mike on Feb 4, 2008 16:28:09 GMT -8
Here's what the Province Newspaper had to say re the SOF campaign, today: tinyurl.com/2cb2gw================ Undo privatization, Liberals urged Union cites costs, launches Save Our Ferries blitz Christina Montgomery, with a file by Andy Ivens The Province Monday, February 04, 2008 The ferry workers union is ramping up a campaign to undo privatization of the fleet -- and restore the system as an extension of B.C.'s highways. With just over a year to the next election, the Save Our Ferries campaign appears to be aimed not at B.C. Ferries, but directly at Premier Gordon Campell's Liberal Party. Campbell privatized running of the fleet in 2003, giving the company a mandate to operate on a commercial basis, float loans for all new vessels and push as fast as possible to full user-pay funding. About 22 million people ride the ferries each year. The campaign will push for public hearings on privatization and an end to it, if the public demands it. To be launched this morning at www.saveourferries.com, the campaign offers detailed analysis of the company's public financial disclosures and concludes that: - The company has outstanding bond debts of $950 million and room for another $335 million in bank loans for new ferries, a total of $1.285 billion in debt that taxpayers will inherit if the company fails. To back its debt, the company has mortgaged its terminal leases, its vessels and even its guaranteed annual provincial subsidy. - The need to generate money that used to be part of regular provincial spending will drive fares up massively by 2011 -- by a minimum of 103 per cent on the Bowen Island route, 82 per cent on the Sunshine Coast, 79 per cent between Port Hardy and Prince Rupert, and 43 per cent on Vancouver Island-Lower Mainland routes. The figures are based on two-per-cent inflation and include fuel surcharges up to 2008. Fares will be higher if further fuel surcharges are approved, or new ship construction is included. - The "scary" financial position of the company requires more public oversight. In late 2006, the auditor-general said the company puts the province at "significant risk" and recommended the government improve monitoring and reporting. Campbell has yet to respond. Gregg Dow, a crew member on the Queen of Nanaimo assigned to run the campaign, said the push is aimed at forcing Campbell to hold public consultations on the Coastal Ferry Act that designed the system. "The ferry system is an economic engine of the province," Dow said. "Higher and higher fares are not good for tourism, for manufacturing, for farming, businesses or the social fabric. The last thing we need to do right now is turn small islands into ghost towns. "User pay? Is the highway to Stewart, or Kimberley, fully user pay? Is TransLink? The Lions Gate Bridge? Do people really think they get on a bus and pay the full cost of running it? Why should ferry users?" Transport Minister Kevin Falcon said fare increases under the NDP in the 1990s were greater than in the past seven years under the Liberals. "And you haven't got politicians interfering," he said. "I think that's a far better system than what we had in the '90s. "What you had in the '90s was a corporation that was basically bankrupt. "The NDP had to write off $1 billion and they, frankly, pissed away half a billion dollars on three boats that are still sitting in the harbour in North Vancouver. "So, the question you have to ask is: What does saveourferries.com want us to go back to? "Apparently, they want us to go back to government running the ferry fleet. I'm asking, 'For what benefit?' " cmontgomery@png.canwest.com © The Vancouver Province 2008 =========================
|
|
|
Post by WettCoast on Feb 4, 2008 16:57:19 GMT -8
Quote from Kevin Falcon, Minister of Transport:
Is this sort of language acceptable coming from a minister of the Crown? I think not!
|
|
|
Post by Low Light Mike on Feb 4, 2008 18:25:39 GMT -8
I am working my way through the content of the SOF site. Here's something I found on the SOF site; a BC Auditor-General report on the new model's governance. www.saveourferries.com/AG%20report/CoastalFerrySys2006.pdfHere's an extract, which refers to an earlier Auditor-General report. I was looking for something that addressed how political-interference could be "regulated" in a Crown-Corp model; and this excerpt addresses that: ======================== So the Auditor General says that in the Crown-Corp model, elected officials can make decisions that are bad choices, and ignore expert-advice when doing so. Wouldn't this be even more so, in a model with the Ministry of Transportation operating the ferries? How would the Ministry of Transportation safeguard against those risks (or would they even consider "political interference" to be a risk at all??). Or is the reward of Gov't influence more important than the risk of Gov't influence? ------------- ps to Gregg: I'm not expecting a reply from you here, as I know that this proboards-ferry forum isn't your official vehicle for this type of debate. So join-in here if you wish, but I realise that some of these questions are better suited for the SOF Tour (to ask Mr. Coons about) or for an all-candidates meeting. You'll be getting people thinking and asking questions....that's a good thing. As for those who read this here, and have the time to sound-off on things re the SOF website and it's content, please do.
|
|
|
Post by Dane on Feb 4, 2008 22:04:14 GMT -8
Compliments on a fantastic website, I love the bit at the bottom with the toll information - brilliantly done!
Brazo Zulu
|
|
Quatchi
Voyager
Engineering Officer - CCG
Posts: 930
|
Post by Quatchi on Feb 4, 2008 22:07:51 GMT -8
Good job. Another one to add to my favorites.
Cheers,
|
|
|
Post by ferrytraveller on Feb 4, 2008 23:36:41 GMT -8
well done, website looks great and soo much good info!
|
|
Mill Bay
Voyager
Long Suffering Bosun
Posts: 2,886
|
Post by Mill Bay on Feb 5, 2008 8:27:12 GMT -8
Quote from Kevin Falcon, Minister of Transport: Is this sort of language acceptable coming from a minister of the Crown? I think not! You should contact him and ask him yourself. Kevin Falcon happens to be one of those people who is not worthy of the trust given him because he knows nothing about what he's doing, and he always blames someone else for any transportation issues, but i guess that's just the party line, isn't it. But remarks like this prove it's a personal attitude of his own and not merely a Liberal policy.
|
|
|
Post by oceaneer77 on Feb 5, 2008 19:52:15 GMT -8
Wow what a great website!!!
The message is great as well.. back when the ferries were originally set up and run by the ferry corp all ran well and WAC bennits navy did serve the islanders.. now the ferries are strangling them.
I am not sure how to manage BCFC properly but the minor routes should be coincided part of the highway system and have a minor toll that keeps people from abusing the privilege. The major routes the same holds true but the toll should be higher as most people do not need it daily.
How dose Washington state do it??
good work Greg!!
ocenaeer77
|
|
|
Post by ferrytraveller on Feb 5, 2008 21:01:00 GMT -8
well i like the fact money is being spent to improve the terminal buildings and ramps, i like the way money is being spend to make some of the vessels more fuel efficient, money is being spent to update the vessels interior (though i know the dogwood interior has much more meaning), an expanded menu, the online reservations and the web site are great, so they are doing some things right. However, i believe the fares should stay lower as the ferries really are an extention of the highway system. I also think every effort should be done to keep the boats built here, because since my tax dollars pay for the subsidies, as do yours, i want the economic benifits of building new boats kept in BC.
|
|
|
Post by ruddernut on Feb 6, 2008 12:00:16 GMT -8
From the website:
A misleading comparison, considering that the Sea-to-Sky Highway is BYOF (bring your own fuel).
|
|
Mill Bay
Voyager
Long Suffering Bosun
Posts: 2,886
|
Post by Mill Bay on Feb 6, 2008 14:30:58 GMT -8
From the website: A misleading comparison, considering that the Sea-to-Sky Highway is BYOF (bring your own fuel). The ferries are bring your own fuel too. It's called a fuel surcharge.
|
|
|
Post by ruddernut on Feb 6, 2008 19:33:58 GMT -8
From the website: A misleading comparison, considering that the Sea-to-Sky Highway is BYOF (bring your own fuel). The ferries are bring your own fuel too. It's called a fuel surcharge. There's also the wear and tear on your vehicle, and the labour in driving it.
|
|
|
Post by kerryssi on Feb 7, 2008 16:32:47 GMT -8
Hi Gregg, took your sugestion and signed up here. For the information of readers I am a retired ferryworker. I have worked as a deckhand on many ships over the past 25 years and have worked with Gregg for several years. I can tell you that what you see on Save our Ferries is for real.
|
|
|
Post by Low Light Mike on Feb 9, 2008 13:01:35 GMT -8
2 Questions for Gregg: 1) How did the U-Vic tour-event on Feb.5th go? - ie. turnout, feedback, etc. 2) Re the portion of the SOF website re BC Shipbuilding: - do you have any idea why the Shipyard Workers' Union is so "Silent" on the subject of the building of MV Island Sky? I think that they don't want people to know that BC workers are actually building a BC Ferry in BC right-now, because it works against their campaign of saying that they aren't getting any work. - Why do you think that the whole Island Sky newbuild is getting such little local publicity? Is this local newbuild an "inconvenient truth" that goes against the message of the SOF campaign? - Is the BC Shipyard Workers' Union embarrassed about their quality of work on the Island Sky? Is that why the union is being deliberate in NOT mentioning anything about the work that BC Workers are doing on the Island Sky? Or is the Union unaware that their members are currently building a BC Ferry in BC? (it sounds like it....) - Gregg: any insight that you can offer re the lack of publicity or comments on the MV Island Sky is appreciated. I can't figure out why the Unions aren't trumpeting the Island Sky as an achievement.....unless there's problems with delay, over-budget etc. - Or the likely reason is simply that BC Shipyard Workers' Union would like the public to believe that they are getting zero newbuild work. The Island Sky is an inconvenient-truth that goes against the political rhetoric of the shipyard union. Or the Island Sky is proof that our BC Shipyards really aren't currently suited to doing the large newbuild work. Rebuttal, please. I'm tired of hearing that shipyard union president with his rhetoric. I wonder if he's even aware of the MV Island Sky..... Thanks for your eventual comments on these items.
|
|
|
Post by kerryssi on Feb 10, 2008 12:56:29 GMT -8
I feel that one very large problem with getting information out to the public is that there is no free press in B.C. at least not any major media. The major media in B.C. is owned by Canwest which is owned by Asper. Asper and hence Canwest are very pro liberal and anti union. It is extremely difficult for any unions or workers to get their side of any story into the media. I have had first hand experience with this. This is the reason that Save our Ferries exists. There is a wealth of factual information but no way to get it out to the public.
|
|
D'Elete BC in NJ
Voyager
Dispensing gallons of useless information daily...
Posts: 1,671
|
Post by D'Elete BC in NJ on Feb 13, 2008 11:32:29 GMT -8
A CBC Daybreak North story about the northern routes and the Save Our Ferries movement. Audio file here.
|
|
Quatchi
Voyager
Engineering Officer - CCG
Posts: 930
|
Post by Quatchi on Feb 13, 2008 22:36:00 GMT -8
2 Questions for Gregg: 1) How did the U-Vic tour-event on Feb.5th go? - ie. turnout, feedback, etc. 2) Re the portion of the SOF website re BC Shipbuilding: - do you have any idea why the Shipyard Workers' Union is so "Silent" on the subject of the building of MV Island Sky? I think that they don't want people to know that BC workers are actually building a BC Ferry in BC right-now, because it works against their campaign of saying that they aren't getting any work. - Why do you think that the whole Island Sky newbuild is getting such little local publicity? Is this local newbuild an "inconvenient truth" that goes against the message of the SOF campaign? - Is the BC Shipyard Workers' Union embarrassed about their quality of work on the Island Sky? Is that why the union is being deliberate in NOT mentioning anything about the work that BC Workers are doing on the Island Sky? Or is the Union unaware that their members are currently building a BC Ferry in BC? (it sounds like it....) - Gregg: any insight that you can offer re the lack of publicity or comments on the MV Island Sky is appreciated. I can't figure out why the Unions aren't trumpeting the Island Sky as an achievement.....unless there's problems with delay, over-budget etc. - Or the likely reason is simply that BC Shipyard Workers' Union would like the public to believe that they are getting zero newbuild work. The Island Sky is an inconvenient-truth that goes against the political rhetoric of the shipyard union. Or the Island Sky is proof that our BC Shipyards really aren't currently suited to doing the large newbuild work. Rebuttal, please. I'm tired of hearing that shipyard union president with his rhetoric. I wonder if he's even aware of the MV Island Sky..... Thanks for your eventual comments on these items. I agree they are probably hiding the fact they actually do have a ship underway, I think they are just irked that they don't get the fancy, extremely public jobs that could and would in my mind earn them respect. One of the guys I work with worked on the Fast Cats (engineer) and he says without a seconds thought that they are extremely well built ships, just badly managed and designed. I don't think to many people know about the Island Sky. There has been many opportunities for press to smash on BC shipbuilder's regarding this build, but no-one has. Maybe once she enters service they may make fuss, but I haven't seen anything in the news about her as of yet. Anyone want to correct me? Cheers,
|
|
|
Post by Hardy on Feb 14, 2008 4:21:28 GMT -8
Very valid posts regarding the "stealth" of the Island Sky. There are not that many news releases from BCFS, and the yard certainly is not trying to do ANY PR work; it sure is not FSG.
Is it that BCFS is disappointed/embarrassed somehow about the IS, or, is it like others have hypothesized, that there are problems such as delays (which we know to be true already) or over-budget (which has been hinted at)?
Again, the deafening silence leaves us to come up with all sorts of our own theories, both fact-based (from what little information we can gather) and imagined-doomsday (which may not be that far off the mark)...
|
|
|
Post by kerryssi on Feb 15, 2008 10:45:44 GMT -8
Your friend is right about the fast cats. They were a well proven design and were well built. The problems with them were created by BCFC management when they added 50 tons to the bow and 50 tons to the stern and lowered the height of the pontoons.
|
|
|
Post by Hardy on Feb 16, 2008 15:44:59 GMT -8
Your friend is right about the fast cats. They were a well proven design and were well built. The problems with them were created by BCFC management when they added 50 tons to the bow and 50 tons to the stern and lowered the height of the pontoons. Don't forget that that design itself was never really 'vetted' for use in our Coastal waters. Similarly designed boats worked elsewhere, but no one really ever did any kind of engineering study to make sure that they would work WELL in our waters and carrying OUR type of traffic loadout. I don't think that the actual DESIGN of the ships nor their WORKMANSHIP is under question, nor has it ever been from my stance, but the compatibility of the ships to the routes they were built for was unacceptable. The cost was unacceptable. The delays were unacceptable. Other than that, they are perfect -- just not for here, just not for us!
|
|
|
Post by kerryssi on Feb 18, 2008 19:21:04 GMT -8
The fast cats were a proven design. Clarke's intention was to boost B.C. shipbuilding by having them built here then building more to sell offshore. His mistake was in handing over the construction to BCFC management. By drastically changing the ships design they altered its characteristics and drove up the costs. BCFC management knew nothing about ship building. In this case it would have been much better if the government had kept control. Keep your eye on SOF for more info on the fast cats and BCFC management next month.
|
|