THE VOLUME IS THERE! What a crock!
If he thinks that this is true, then it is time for Louis Ranger to be transferred to a new Department. Canadians, and especially those of us in Windsor, cannot afford for him to remain in his job any longer, especially financially.
Who is Louis Ranger you might ask...well just read on, dear reader, and you shall see how important he is in your daily life. We will look behind the curtain in Oz.
It appears that one of the Canadian TV networks wants to import the British sitcom "Yes, Minister" into Canada. In case you are not familiar with that program, and it can be seen on cable, here is a description given by the BBC:
- "The series follows Right Honorable James Hacker MP, Minister for Administrative Affairs, and his attempts to make officialdom and administration make sense. He does this whilst pushing his own self-serving agenda, and keeping his head above any nasty political waters. Throughout his career, he's up against Whitehall’s Sir Humphrey Appleby, unflappable symbol of a machine that has no gears, only brakes.
Jim's policies, whether cutting costs or trying to streamline red tape, are sabotaged by Appleby's Machiavellian skills, often accompanied by brain-wrenching sentences designed to confuse Hacker - and often succeeding. Absolutely snobbish and elitist, yet blind to anything that does not serve the Whitehall way, Sir Humphrey is the avatar of the British State."
Sounds like the way the political process works in Canada too--bureaucrats with the long-term vision and the short-term thinking politicians who just want to keep being reelected--so it would not be such a great leap to run it on television here.
As you will have noticed, generally when the British programs are imported into North America their titles change. Apparently the title being discussed at this time is "Yes, Tranport Minister" if the negotiations over bringing the sitcom here are successfully finalized.
Why was that title chosen you might think. Clearly, the producers of the Canadian version want to take the most absurd example of how a Minister is controlled by his bureaucrats and let us in on the secret. It would be even more hilarious in the Canadian context if it is based on real-life.
Transport Canada is the perfect Department for that. It is pretty clear now that bureaucratic bumbling may result in Canadian taxpayers and perhaps some private investors, like a pension fund for instance, being required to pay out billions of dollars on the construction of a new bridge and border crossing in Windsor that is not needed at this time. Taxpayers I am certain will be required to guarantee the project against loss and will also be required to subsidize it for millions of dollars every year as it slowly but surely goes broke.
What makes it even funnier is that a private investor, the owner of the existing bridge which is recognized as the best border operation, is prepared to risk his money instead of the Government's money on a project to provide another crossing. So not only do the bureaucrats want to build their bridge but they are trying to prevent the private investor from building his and trying to put him out of business at the same time.
Now isn't that a knee slapper. My sides split from laughing when I heard about how much this will cost us, and I don't mean the cost for producing the TV series. The joke is surely on us as the bureaucrats rule and our pocketbooks are emptied.
I have to tell you though that my only concern for the producers of the series is that it might be so unbelievable to the general public that no one would take it seriously and view it. No one surely could believe that in Canada a billion dollars could be wasted on a project that is so totally out of control. I take that back... gun registry!
It will be a great hit after all, the number one comedy on Canadian television.
I've always suspected that the bureaucrats were in charge and it really didn't matter who the politicians were. Bill C-3 or rather an earlier version of it was introduced by the Liberals and then promoted heavily by the Conservatives when they became the Government. In fact, it was the second piece of legislation introduced by the Conservative Government...that is how important it was to the bureaucrats to get passed.
Why I am sure we could have a terrific episode showing bureaucrats from Transport Canada telling Senators that the passing of the legislation was a "slam-dunk" and that they need not concern themselves about it. Then we could show the scrambling of the bureaucrats as it appeared that questions were raised about the Act by the Bridge Company who were getting a sympathetic hearing. The episode would show what Transport had to do and say to get it passed finally. The come-uppance for the bureaucrats would be the Senators' written "Observations" or their explanation of why they did what they did as the episode ended. The bureaucratic joy would be short-lived and would turn to consternation since they knew the courts would use the Observations language in any litigation. What a hoot that would be as the first episode in the series, a 60-minute show for sure as the opener.
Now I bet that you are saying that I'm being terribly unfair and that all I am doing is setting out another one of my theories. How wrong you are. You should know by now that I have backup. Let me provide the following to you from a House of Commons Committee meeting as reported in Hansard. This was done in public too so no one gave me any inside information either:
Standing Committee on Transport, Infrastructure and Communities
EVIDENCE
CONTENTS
Thursday, December 13, 2007
- Mr. Brian Masse:
Mr. Minister, you'll be surprised that I want to ask a question about the Windsor-Detroit border, shocking as that might be.
You've been out for two years peddling the Windsor-Detroit border as a public-private partnership. What study have you done or has your department done on a P3 specific to this most important border crossing? And would you be willing to table that study, if there is one?
Hon. Lawrence Cannon:
I'll let the deputy minister respond to that. He's been more active on that file.
Mr. Brian Masse:
With all due respect, I'd prefer to have you respond to that. That's very specific.
Hon. Lawrence Cannon:
No, but in terms of the study, Mr. Masse, it will take a second, because it's a long process.
Mr. Brian Masse:
Okay, thank you.
Mr. Louis Ranger (Deputy Minister, Department of Transport):
It's all part of the environmental assessment process. We've been conducting--
Mr. Brian Masse:
I'm not asking about the environmental assessment. Have you studied a P3, in a specific study, yes or no?
Mr. Louis Ranger:
Definitely, most definitely.
Mr. Brian Masse:
Okay. Would you be willing to table that study so Parliament could see that study?
Mr. Louis Ranger:
We could share with you the various components of what we would bring to the table as a P3 in the form of an environmental assessment, in the form of geo-technical studies, in the form of what we bring in terms of land assembly--
Hon. Lawrence Cannon:
Mr. Masse, I guess within the new year we will be seeking information.
Is that correct, Deputy?
Mr. Louis Ranger:
That's right...
Mr. Brian Masse:
Why have you departed from, for example, the Blue Water experience? Maybe you can provide that. Why is it you have decided to depart from that historic, successful venture that hasn't cost public taxpayers and that has lower fares than in many other spots? Why are you departing from that? Is it based upon ideology? Is it based upon serious research? What is the reason you're departing from a practice historic to Canada?
Hon. Lawrence Cannon:
I'll let the deputy take that.
Mr. Louis Ranger:
All the conditions converge to a P3. It's a structure where you can control access. The volume is there.
Three weeks ago there was a conference in Toronto, and we held a session for two hours with the best minds in Canada in terms of experts in P3. Everybody agrees, all the conditions are met--...
Mr. Brian Masse:
With all due respect, you're going to the Canadian Council for Public-Private Partnerships, so of course they're going to have a big hurrah for you...
So what's driving this? Has there been hard research done to determine whether this crossing, the most important one for our economy, is actually going to be more successful, have lower toll rates, and be more accountable as a private entity? Because that's not the case with the current private operator. It basically holds much of our economy right now at risk.
Hon. Lawrence Cannon:
...The P3 process, as I mentioned, is a process. It's not something where the deputy gets up in the morning and says “Okay, fine, I woke up this morning at 6:30, and I believe this is the way we're going to go.” It is a process that, step by step, will lead us to a final determination."
Accordingly, it is now obvious that the one person to whom the finger can be pointed who has to take real responsibility for the mess in Windsor is Mr. Ranger whether one looks at what happened under the Liberal Government or under the Conservative Government. "Following a two-year assignment with the Privy Council in the mid 1990s, Mr. Ranger returned to Transport Canada where he became Assistant Deputy Minister, Policy and Associate Deputy Minister of Transport." He has been Deputy Minister since May, 13, 2002. On February 7, 2006, he became Deputy Minister of Transport, Infrastructure and Communities. He has been there through all of this time.
You want to know what's really funny... Mr. Ranger thinks "The volume is there." Doesn't he know that DRIC has revised downward the volume of traffic at the Windsor Detroit border? Hasn't he been given the volumes of traffic and seen how they have decreased significantly since 1999? If Transport Canada has been involved in looking at the financing of the Windsor/Detroit Tunnel, then he knows that its volume has sunk like a stone. What can possibly cause an increase in volume of traffic when the Big Three in Windsor are going into the toilet, when businesses are closing with Windsor having just about the highest rate of unemployment in the country and with tourists staying away in droves.
Why only two weeks before, in a speech that I am sure the Deputy approved, his Minister stated:
- "The existing border crossings between Windsor and Detroit have performed admirably in moving commuters, travellers and goods from one country to the other for many years.
There is no question they will continue to be an integral part of this strategic gateway. However, as business people on both sides of the border know well, we need to do more to keep Canada competitive and support continued economic growth.
We have to increase capacity over the next few decades in order to maximize trade and strengthen our already strong partnership with US neighbours.
And that is precisely what the Government of Canada intends to do."
DUH.......It is "decades," Deputy, when capacity will need to be increased, not tomorrow. That has been the experience in Sarnia too where hundreds of millions of dollars have been wasted.
The Deputy must be living in his own world of fantasy statistics and border volumes. From yesterday's front-page Star story:
- "Border trips by trucks down
Trevor Wilhelm, January 14, 2008
The number of cross-border truck trips fell to a decade low last year, further evidence that a strong loonie, high fuel costs and border delays are battering Ontario's export-based economy, according to the Ontario Trucking Association.
OTA president David Bradley also lamented the ongoing delay in finalizing plans for a new crossing in Windsor, the busiest entry spot between Canada and the U.S., where truckers can face long and frequent delays.
There were 8,049,136 truck trips across the Ontario-U.S. border in 2007, according to figures from the Bridge and Tunnel Operators Association. It was the third straight year that cross-border truck trips declined, and the lowest number of crossings since 1998.
Last year saw a 2.6 per cent decrease from 2006, when truckers crossed the border 8,267,931 times. Even in 2001, with border delays and security crackdowns following 9-11, there were 72,000 more cross-border truck trips than last year."
TRUCK VOLUMES ARE DOWN DEPUTY FOR THE LAST THREE YEARS! That means fewer trucks than the DRIC projections show, not more. Volume and capacity were the main reasons for the DRIC bridge in the first place remember.
Both the Bridge and Tunnel saw losses of traffic last year, both car and truck, with the Tunnel's overall losses being the largest for any major crossing in Ontario, almost 2.5 times larger than the average.
Here's the big problem. The bureaucrats cannot wait for some future time. It is the unknown that concerns them and is their only risk. At that time there may well be a different Government whose Ministers actually are concerned about not wasting taxpayer money and who are prepared to control their Departments and not just gear up to form a majority Government. The US DRIC consultant in fact stated that the Ambassador Gateway project itself without a new crossing being built can handle about 5.4 million trucks, several million more than are being handled today. That volume may not be reached for 20 years or more. Just ask the MDOT director! Deputy Ranger is so lucky that Minister Cannon's main function is to get Conservatives elected in Québec thereby allowing Mr. Ranger to run the Department the way he wants.
It is clear now that this is total irresponsible action by a bureaucracy that is running on a tangent of its own with a Minister who has no idea what is going on. It is being done to put one private operator out of business and then ironically to give the control of the crossing to another private operator to meet some bureaucratic agenda that has never been explained to us properly! This is a huge boondoggle costing the taxpayer billions but no one in Ottawa or Queen's Park seems to care!
So the joke is on taxpayers and that should make a terrific TV series. We can laugh heartily as we see our money being spent on a bridge that is not needed with volume that is not there and then show every year how the Minister of Finance has to justify subsidizing that bridge to his Cabinet colleagues. Watch as the Transport Minister sinks under the table as the budget is being discussed. Why I bet there might even be an episode where the Transport Minister might be meeting with the Prime Minister to explain why the Government has to take over all of the crossings in Southwest Ontario because they have all been bankrupted. That one should be a real howler.
Now you understand the federal perspective on the border file. If you think Ontario is any better, you are wrong there too. One of the authors of the Joint Management Committee Report back in 2002, Bruce McQuaig, has just been appointed the Deputy Minister in Ontario of the Ministry of Transportation.
I can hardly wait for the episode when the two Deputies meet with the Mayor of Windsor. Now that episode would be a real farce.
No comments:
Post a Comment