[rbt]

Did Miller even apply for the Building Canada Fund? There was certainly nothing in the press about that. And that fund is still running...there are regular announcements about it.

BCF disappeared when Stimulus (or rather, the budget deficit) came about. The only things that qualified were applied for long long ago against the 2007 budget, which is why Sheppard and Union Station? got BCF money.

 

[rbt]

The one catch, is that the contract for the current cars is between the City and Bombardier; so it's difficult for the Province to take out the option; though I guess that the City could exercise the option, and re-sell the vehicles to the Province.

I don't think it would be difficult for the city to expand on the order either with an adjustment for inflation factored in.

That said, tendering again does not remove the option to buy through the existing contract. Provided the new tender doesn't cause significant delays (> 6 months), it is probably worth while doing.

 

[299 bloor call control.]

BCF disappeared when Stimulus (or rather, the budget deficit) came about. The only things that qualified were applied for long long ago against the 2007 budget, which is why Sheppard and Union Station? got BCF money.

Which is incredibly weird how Waterloo Region LRT got their funding. Tories claim that it wasn't from stimulus, but from the Building Canada Fund, which no longer had a budget to fund Waterloo.

 

[rbt]

Which is incredibly weird how Waterloo Region LRT got their funding. Tories claim that it wasn't from stimulus, but from the Building Canada Fund, which no longer had a budget to fund Waterloo.

It really boils down to when the request was made and what the province did with it, since it was the province that chose where BCF funds went.

I expect Waterloo LRT made the request in 2007; same time as Toronto started looking for funding for Sheppard LRT.

 

[kEiThZ]

BCF disappeared when Stimulus (or rather, the budget deficit) came about. The only things that qualified were applied for long long ago against the 2007 budget, which is why Sheppard and Union Station? got BCF money.

Just google BCF, theres cities and town all over the country still getting money from it....and not all of it are old announcements.

 

[kEiThZ]

I expect Waterloo LRT made the request in 2007; same time as Toronto started looking for funding for Sheppard LRT.

I doubt that. They only got going in earnest last year when Metrolinx picked up steam as well.

 

[waterloowarrior]

a Building Canada Framework Agreement between ontario and the feds was signed in July 2008 and included working toward funding for rapid transit in Waterloo Region as one of the first priorities.
http://www.marketwire.com/press-release/Infrastructure-Canada-882490.html This was in the works long before people were thinking about stimulus money.

 

[rbt]

a Building Canada Framework Agreement between ontario and the feds was signed in July 2008 and included working toward funding for rapid transit in Waterloo Region as one of the first priorities.
http://www.marketwire.com/press-release/Infrastructure-Canada-882490.html This was in the works long before people were thinking about stimulus money.

That's what I thought. So discussions along this manner with the province would have started in March 2008 or earlier; and preliminary discussions long before that.

 

[rbt]

Just google BCF, theres cities and town all over the country still getting money from it....and not all of it are old announcements.

Not all old announcements but it was all budgeted (for Ontario) by June/July 2008.

Monies are from the 2007 federal budget surplus which was released after the surplus was confirmed (can take 6 months) and discussions with provinces were complete regarding allocation (can take years).

 

[kEiThZ]

That's what I thought. So discussions along this manner with the province would have started in March 2008 or earlier; and preliminary discussions long before that.

Not all old announcements but it was all budgeted (for Ontario) by June/July 2008.

Monies are from the 2007 federal budget surplus which was released after the surplus was confirmed (can take 6 months) and discussions with provinces were complete regarding allocation (can take years).

If it was doled out in June/July 2008 there is no way that it could have been budgeted for in March 2008. Federal accounting rules don't allow for that. The federal Ministry of Finance has rather strict rules on committing funds to projects in specific years. It isn't Wall Street where you can go back and re-state expenditures for some years. If you are suggesting that a deal was signed in March 2008 when the announcement was made in a different fiscal year, I'd love to see any links you have to explain that and how it conforms to federal spending guidelines.

That discussions would have started prior to the announcement is simply prudence on the part of the negotiators. I would hope that Miller had done the same. But from what I have seen the press so far, I am doubtful that he did. It seems to me that although they expected the feds to pay for the streetcars, there was no mention of them seeking funds from any federal program other than the stimulus. And there has been no news of any negotiations with the feds prior to their sole application for dedicating stimulus money to the streetcars.....and that is still aside from the question that when other municipalities, big and small, across the realm have complied with the guidelines, what makes Toronto so special that it should expect the federal government to hand over 100s of millions for a project that does not meet a single criteria of the stimulus program? Why the exception for Toronto? As our neighbours have pointed out, if there's an exception for Toronto's streetcars, then they most certainly have projects that require similar exceptions. I for one, do not support setting up precedents for any municipality that threaten to make Swiss Cheese out of federal programs and priorities.

 

[rbt]

If it was doled out in June/July 2008 there is no way that it could have been budgeted for in March 2008.

Technically, yes, by federal law all surplus funds must go against the debt. There is absolutely nothing that says seconds later you cannot borrow all or part of that amount back out again. There is also nothing in the law stating that you cannot peg the new value taken out to be a specific percentage or portion of the surplus funds from a prior year.

Making $4B appear and disappear on the books simultaneous to rolling over a $100B bond group to a new group is a pretty trivial accounting manoeuvrer.


My favourite is how Toronto gets all giddy about being able to borrow $250M every year for capital expenditures; immediately after $250M of debt is paid off from the operations budget. What really happens is we rollover the debt but due to provincial law mandating debt be paid down, we are sure to show that on the books we paid down old debt.

 

[kEiThZ]

Technically, yes, by federal law all surplus funds must go against the debt.

That applies to general revenue and operational surplus not earmarked funds such as the BCF. I know this because the federal office that I work for had money taken away last year that it didn't spend.

There is absolutely nothing that says seconds later you cannot borrow all or part of that amount back out again.

Given that until the recession last year the Finance Ministry was reporting a decrease in the accumulated deficit (net debt) every year prior since the Chretien days, what you assert has certainly not been the case. Can you show an example where the federal government has done what you suggest?

There is also nothing in the law stating that you cannot peg the new value taken out to be a specific percentage or portion of the surplus funds from a prior year.

.....

Making $4B appear and disappear on the books simultaneous to rolling over a $100B bond group to a new group is a pretty trivial accounting manoeuvrer.

.....

My favourite is how Toronto gets all giddy about being able to borrow $250M every year for capital expenditures; immediately after $250M of debt is paid off from the operations budget. What really happens is we rollover the debt but due to provincial law mandating debt be paid down, we are sure to show that on the books we paid down old debt.

There aren't too many laws restricting how the federal government spends money. But then again the federal government (regardless of which party is in power) tends to follow more stringent accounting practices than the private sector or the municipalities. There's a lot of dodgy accounting that Toronto gets away with that the federal government could never contemplate. Again, can you cite a fiscal year other than the last one where the federal government held debt constant in the last decade? And can you cite any sort of decline in BCF funding? It seems to me that BCF funding has remained constant and is still operating (supposed to cover 2007-2014 time frame):

http://www.buildingcanada-chantiers...progfin/target-viser/bcf-fcc/bcf-fcc-eng.html

It seems quite clear to me that the infrastructure money was set aside in a new fund:

http://www.buildingcanada-chantierscanada.gc.ca/creating-creation/isf-fsi-eng.html

It would seem logical to me that the federal government would have a new fund for the stimulus money (because of the need to get it spent quickly). I have not seen anything that has altered the commitments from previous budgets for the BCF. It's still 8.8 billion over 2007 to 2014. If you have evidence to the contrary then please do share it.

 

[W. K. Lis]

Was reading this little tidbit about Bombardier's FLEXITY Outlook in Geneva, Switzerland:

The comfortable vehicle interior impresses with a friendly colour scheme and features a novel indirect lighting system as well as air-condition. In terms of equipment special attention has been paid to the safety of passengers and security for the operator: each vehicle is equipped with a video-surveillance-system including eight cameras and a video screen in the driver's cab. This enables the driver to observe the passenger area at a stop and to react quickly in case of emergency. At off-peak times the rear part of the vehicle can be locked up with a partition door providing passengers with closer contact to the driver. Another important feature of the new trams for Geneva is the infotainment-system which consists of three monitors per vehicle and shows information on upcoming stops and connections as well as news and advertisements.

Remember the incident back on September 2nd on a night bus.

No sound.

With the light rail vehicles being 28m long, or almost 3 bus lengths, the driver will not be able to hear anything in the back over the noise and chatter. Will there be on-off microphones, so that the driver can listen and respond to incidents. There are currently speakers.

 

[W. K. Lis]

BOMBARDIER FLEXITY Trams from Brussels STIB Begin Voyage to the Vancouver 2010 Olympic and Paralympic Winter Games

From the Bombardier News Release:

October 12, 2009 — Berlin
Transportation

Bombardier vehicles will provide free passenger service between the Olympic and Paralympic Village and Granville Island, 7 days a week, 18 hours a day​

Today, in a celebratory event hosted by the Brussels Transport Company STIB (Société des Transports Intercommunaux de Bruxelles), two FLEXITY trams marked their departure for Vancouver, Canada, where they will operate in a unique streetcar demonstration project during the Vancouver 2010 Olympic and Paralympic Winter Games. The 32-metre long vehicles will be transported to Bremerhaven, Germany, where they will start their voyage across the high seas. Travelling through the Panama Canal, the award-winning vehicles are scheduled to arrive in Vancouver in early December 2009.

Bombardier Transportation and the City of Vancouver are co-sponsors of the Olympic Line project. This sponsorship is complementary to Bombardier’s role as an Official Supporter of the 2010 Olympic and Paralympic Winter Games and designer/ manufacturer of the Olympic torches.

The FLEXITY trams will provide free passenger service between the Olympic and Paralympic Village and Granville Island, a key entertainment centre for the 2010 Winter Games. From January 21 until March 21, 2010, Bombardier will operate the FLEXITY vehicles 7 days a week, 18 hours a day, at 6 to 7 minutes headway on the 1.8-km Olympic Line. This 60-day demonstration period will provide accessible, environmentally friendly and sustainable transportation for over 500,000 Vancouver residents, visitors and athletes from all over the world.

Speaking at the celebratory event in Brussels, André Navarri, President of Bombardier Transportation, said: “Population growth, urbanisation, congestion and pollution are all resulting in a ‘Renaissance’ in public transport and with it a revival of the tram - as many urban centres consider modern tram technology as an important component of public transit planning and sustainable transportation. In many cities around the world, modern trams are transporting people quickly, efficiently and in comfort and at the same time, are helping cities to breathe once again by reducing pollution and congestion. We are delighted to be able to demonstrate this increasingly popular solution in public transport to the City of Vancouver.â€

Alain Flausch, Chief Executive Officer of the STIB, commented: “We are very proud that our FLEXITY Outlook tram with its Art Nouveau excellent design has been selected by our colleagues of Vancouver and Bombardier as an example of what a modern and efficient tram should look like and be. I am confident that being there with our tram in the middle of a worldwide event like the Winter Olympics will contribute both to the future success of the tram on the North American continent and to the image of Brussels as a city dedicated to public transport and sustainable mobilityâ€.

Brigitte Grouwels, Minister of Transport of the Brussels Capital Region, concluded: “As Minister of Transport in the Brussels Capital region I am very proud that our Brussels Transport company will provide two BOMBARDIER FLEXITY streetcars on loan for the 2010 Winter Games. This FLEXITY model has definitely proven its functionality in our city. Passengers with childrens' strollers, for example, benefit from these low floor vehicles that enable a continuous flow of passengers. They are also important in reducing CO2 emissions. This partnership is an excellent opportunity to underscore our image as an energy conscious and environmentally friendly capital of not only Belgium, but of Europe as well.â€

The Brussels FLEXITY tram has been recognized in the industry for best-in-class innovation and design. It received the prestigious “Henry Van de Velde label†(2007) for its contemporary interpretation of the Art Nouveau style and a “Design at Work†Award (2008) for innovative product development and outstanding design qualities.

Currently, more than 450 100% low-floor FLEXITY vehicles are in successful revenue service in Augsburg (Germany), Brussels (Belgium), Linz and Innsbruck (Austria), Lodz (Poland), Eskisehir (Turkey), Geneva (Switzerland), Marseille (France), Valencia and Alicante (Spain), and will soon be put into operation in Palermo (Italy) and Krefeld (Germany). Similar 100% low floor technology will soon be supplied to the City of Toronto, which recently awarded the largest ever light rail contract of 204 streetcars to Bombardier Transportation.

 

[bhavin103]

Eglinton LRT

I found this photo of the proposed Eglinton LRT in a Home magazine