News   GLOBAL  |  Apr 02, 2020
 9.7K     0 
News   GLOBAL  |  Apr 01, 2020
 41K     0 
News   GLOBAL  |  Apr 01, 2020
 5.5K     0 

So, once again, ML is spending money on infrastructure without any guarantees that they can make use of it,

It's about the backdrop for the election in 5 months. These cronies at ML want to keep their friends very close (i.e. keep them as MPP's). They don't care about the taxpayers money.

After all Hamilton has a few swing seats that are really important
 
My view is that it's the Province, via the Minister, that directs the agwncy. So, that's where the responsibility rests.
Not sure it matters to be honest......we are spending precious dollars on if restructure that we have no idea when (or if really) we will be able to take full (or any) advantage of.
 
^ I debated whether I should bother expanding on my thinking or just move on to other topics, but I decided to at least provide more on my perspective. Not trying to win an argument here and understand some may disagree. I realize a distinction between the Province, the Government, and Metrolinx is somewhat nuanced. The challenge in my mind that I've seen MPPs (of all parties), or municipal councillors, use Metrolinx as a convenient punching bag or scapegoat when things go wrong, or they defer to it and claim there's nothing they can do or everything is their fault. In this case, as best I can tell and in my opinion, Metrolinx is implementing what they are being asked to do. It's the government that's taking the risk that they'll have a deal with CN. I'm not suggesting the people that work at any agency, or municipal staff, are always right, perfect, and don't have room for improvement.

When there's an agency that's responsible for delivering and operating transit and requires public confidence and trust and yet has to take direction on service planning, announcements, timing, funding priority, etc from the Minister/Province/MPPs, I believe it can start to erode that public trust and confidence when the people with the ultimate responsibility aren't referenced or mentioned. I'll close with another example.

The AG report on Metrolinx looked pretty bad, but the reality was (someone can correct me if I'm wrong) they only looked at a small percentage of projects. Again, certainly there's room for Metrolinx to be more open and that's come up before, but on the specific topic of service expansion, deals or the lack of deals with CN and CP, I see it as elected officials want things to open as quickly as possible and send orders to make it happen. I am doubtful we will ever see an elected official step up and say, "You know what, I really wanted this service and directed Metrolinx to make it happen. I underestimated how difficult it would be to get an agreement with CN/CP. I was the one who decided to take the risk." Or, "yes, we spent a lot of money and didn't get access to all the way to Bramalea Station from CN. I see the downsides of the deal I, as Minister/the Government struck."

Plus, while the opposition talks a big game about doing things differently, they'll face the same pressures as the current government to expand service, and I wonder if anything will change in terms of how a Minster/government/MPPs treat the agency. The Cambridge service expansion situation. and recent comments, is an interesting example.
 
When there's an agency that's responsible for delivering and operating transit and requires public confidence and trust and yet has to take direction on service planning, announcements, timing, funding priority, etc from the Minister/Province/MPPs, I believe it can start to erode that public trust and confidence when the people with the ultimate responsibility aren't referenced or mentioned. I'll close with another example.
...
Plus, while the opposition talks a big game about doing things differently, they'll face the same pressures as the current government to expand service, and I wonder if anything will change in terms of how a Minster/government/MPPs treat the agency. The Cambridge service expansion situation. and recent comments, is an interesting example.

This - just look at how Del Duca was able to skew the internal processes.
 
^again, if you are standing railside in Cambridge waiting for a train/train service to arrive...why do you care if it is the government or their appointed agency that is making you wait?

ML always will be directed by politicians....so I see no value in splitting hairs over "who is at fault".....we, the taxpayers of Ontario, are again paying for piece of infrastructure that only has value if an agreement has been reached with CN and there is no indication that that agreement is close at hand...this applies to the new station in Stoney Creek and the tunnel under the 401 in the KW corridor....and, likely, other things too.

EDIT: this is response to Allandale25's post.....Alvinofdiaspar slipped in between.
 
^again, if you are standing railside in Cambridge waiting for a train/train service to arrive...why do you care if it is the government or their appointed agency that is making you wait?

If I had a conversation with that person standing railside at Cambridge (or even Brampton, Bowmanville, Niagara Falls, or even with anyone on bursting at the seems platform at Union frustrated at how long it'll take for RER to happen), I would try to explain that one group has more of a responsibility and power to create change than the other. Encouraging people to get in touch with their MPP, organize community meeting, start a group, isn't a bad thing in my mind and can be effective. Switching gears to the construction side, the Options 4 Davenport folks have been successful at pushing for a bigger public realm budget than what may have been provided in the past.

Would the person I'm talking to come to see things my way? Maybe, maybe not. But I would still try. Others may find that to be a fruitless approach, a waste of time, or no need to separate the two. I still think it can be helpful.
 
I have no doubt that the ML people who are tasked with negotiating with CN are doing the job to the best of their ability. (I would still love to know the back story on how GO invested in the Halton Sub, and then found it couldn't add more trains.... but that may be old news from a previous decade). So I agree we shouldn't bash them just because there is not yet a deal with CN. However....the Webster syndrome is alive and well in ML space.

ML's governance - its Board, and its Executives, have a responsibility (just as City staff do in the Toronto transit foibles) to lay out what stands in the way of getting a project done. And the government has to be transparent about the "missing steps" in that project.... saying they are bringing us transit while everyone pretends not to notice that a bridge hasn't been built, or a section of line can't be used, is dishonest.

It certainly appears that ML has figured out that the Province has been quite OK with dissembling, and they have realised that this is good for them too.... where they may have performed badly, they feel free to cover that up. The thing snowballs.

I agree that ultimately the higher level - the politicians, and the Ministry - hold the higher onus to apply a principled and transparent regime to all this. The Wynne cabinet is egregious in not doing that. But I would expect much more from ML's brass.

That's why the handshakes are golden - sometimes they are the only thanks you get for leading a public agency and doing the right thing.


- Paul
 
My friend was delayed an hour on the Barrie GO today at Maple where someone allegedly drove their car into the platform and even the tracks.

https://twitter.com/GOtransitBR/status/962116971549593607

Would GO refund fares in this situation?
It set off a never-ending cascade.
(We definitely more track in the Barrier corridor for operational flexibility!)

upload_2018-2-9_22-0-33.png
 

Attachments

  • upload_2018-2-9_22-0-33.png
    upload_2018-2-9_22-0-33.png
    210.9 KB · Views: 376
There's a solution to this recurring car on tracks thing. It would work for the Queens Quay tunnel, also.
- Paul
View attachment 134515
upload_2018-2-11_18-25-11.png


Attention

*loud emergency horn sounds*

"GO Attendant (on station's loudspeakers): Attention, car on track. Please immediately leave your premium import car and remove all belongings within 180 seconds. If not clear, the friendly station attendant will execute mandatory removal of humans prior to our train-assisted removal of your vehicle. For your safety, please stand clear a minimum of 50 meters away from the track to be beyond shrapnel range. All fragments of your obstructing vehicle will be returned to you within our 48 hour guarantee. Thank you and have a nice day."
 

Attachments

  • upload_2018-2-11_18-25-11.png
    upload_2018-2-11_18-25-11.png
    226.5 KB · Views: 619
Last edited:
View attachment 134608

Attention

*loud emergency horn sounds*

"GO Attendant (on station's loudspeakers): Attention, car on track. Please immediately leave your premium import car and remove all belongings within 180 seconds. If not clear, the friendly station attendant will execute mandatory removal of humans prior to our train-assisted removal of your vehicle. For your safety, please stand clear a minimum of 50 meters away from the track to be beyond shrapnel range. All fragments of your obstructing vehicle will be returned to you within our 48 hour guarantee. Thank you and have a nice day."

 

Back
Top