Tuesday, September 18, 2012

More On Christy Clark's Cuts To Translink


For the record, and your reading enjoyment (especially since you are not getting this type of info from the Usual Suspects, many of whom are still on their extended three hour cruise)...

First, from Stephen Rees, who really knows this stuff, and who was also at the big shindig at Translink headquarters yesterday:

"....The apparent failure of transit is quite clearly not the fault of Translink’s Board or management. The blame must be laid at the feet of the politicians – the BC Liberal government and the Mayors – who continue to battle over the same ground they were fighting over fifteen years ago...." 

And the following is from Peter Ladner, who has been making a whole lotta sense on matters transit since his unshackling from the Spam-A-Lotteers he was once joined at the hip with:

...According to Langley-based Jordan Bateman of the Canadian Taxpayers’ Federation (what is that, anyway?), most people think transit is a good idea for their friends and neighbours but not for them, so they don’t want to pay for it.
That’s the message that caused Premier Christy Clark to kick aside, without any consultation or negotiation, a painfully crafted proposal to approve a vehicle levy to keep transit moving and improving.
Here’s what I think is really going on: “We need to wait and see TransLink run more efficiently” really means “I don’t want to pay for someone else’s transit.”
“TransLink is politically unaccountable” really means “I don’t want to pay for someone else’s transit.”
“We’re being taxed to death” really means “I don’t want to pay for someone else’s transit.”
“We have to wait until the economy recovers before investing in more rapid transit” really means “I don’t want to pay for someone else’s transit.”
So the question becomes: When does “someone else’s transit” become “my transit, my way of getting around,” or something that benefits me – not just my friends and neighbours? When will enough voters view transit as being in their interest?...

Heavens to mergetroid!

Did Mr. Ladner just kinda/sorta fisk the words of the local layer of the proverbial plasticized transit turf?

Words that are often wurlitzered, unchallenged, all over the Lotuslandian media landscape these days.

Why, yes, I believe he did.

And just a point of clarification for a taxfed nation....The stuff in brackets in the PLadner quote above is most definitely not mine....



Anonymous said...

While we're talking about provincial coffers...

Recently the BC Liberals belatedly announced that natural gas revenues are down, and blah, blah, blah.

Yesterday (Sept. 17) the British Columbia Real Estate Association let us know that sales numbers are down across the board. Total deals are down, average deal price is down and down is the expected direction for the foreseeable future.

What is going to happen to the revenues from the property transfer tax? Mike de Jong needs to be WARNED so he doesn't get blindsided... again.

RossK said...


Excellent point...And will probably be grasped by Cookie-Man Mike sometime soon enough...Because, well, you know...NGas revenues have not actually gone down since the budget was announced last spring.


Mr. Beer N. Hockey said...

People may, and I do mean may, start taking ownership of B.C's transit shortly after Iran has been nuked and Alberta votes NDP.

People like me think our lack of trains to get around is embarrassing. Ever try explaining to a European about dropping service from North Van to Prince George? They think we are mad.

They are right.

A surcharge on legal dope sales would just about solve all our problems.

Politician's toothy smiles is not getting it done. Fact is, most of those toothy politician's smiles have become false teeth as we roll along on the road to ruin.