“Our transit system is one of the best and most efficient in the world.”
That’s according to Peter Fassbender, the provincial minister responsible for TransLink, who gave a speech at “Rethinking the Region 4” in New Westminster this weekend. But he added, it’s problems cannot be addressed by simply writing a cheque. (That’s reserved for this.)
Other comments of note:
- I am not prepared to change governance again – except to make the existing one work better.
- We don’t want to lose window of opportunity with federal money. Let’s get on with short-term issues.
- Someone has to make a decision. You’ll never get to consensus on everything.
- My goal is to deliver a world class transportation system to meet the needs of the region in the future.
I’d like to know these “problems” that Tranklink is supposedly rife with. Aside from the sin of imperfection, it provides the most extensive, most reliable transit service I’ve ever regularly used. How much vitriol is directed at Translink from people who never use it?
I think it’s much less regarding complaints about the general service, the faults appear to lie in the management. The mass firings over the past year of prominent managers and 1%-wealthy executives really makes people think that something, many things, are not going right at the head offices. The struggles between the various mayors and the board. There have also been terrible, expensive and multi-year delays in implementing new technologies.
There certainly seems to be a cavalier attitude with money and nothing but the constant demand for more while hundreds of managers are making over a hundred thousand dollars a year.
The public is overwhelmingly convinced that there is loads of massive excess fat and waste.
Weren’t only the tiny and wealthy village of Belcarra and one of the island communities the ones that voted to give TransLink even more money? That speaks volumes.
Still not buying it. The mass firings are a knee-jerk response from Translink and provincial managers to make it look like they’re doing something in response to a problem that’s never existed. As far as management is concerned, it’s a large transit agency. The salaries might be beyond the median income in the region, but certainly not beyond what higher managers make elsewhere. This is only a problem of people thinking there’s a problem. Institutional hypochondria.
Maybe you’re right Dan. Perhaps it’s time to go to the people again. Another $10 million taxpayer dollars in a campaign. Can they round up that kind of money and all those endorsements again now?
Let’s go for it.
Just because 60% of voters voted against Translink, doesn’t make them right. The same percentage of Texans believe climate change is a hoax. Does that majority warrant sole ownership of the truth, too?
If 60% of a group of citizens believe in something then it is indeed a brave politician that asks those same people to vote against their beliefs, with their money.
Democracy is so messy and bothersome.
One has to wonder how some of those on the Mayors’ Council will fare come the next election.
I have to agree with Dan here. Do you really expect to get top-quality management / executives for the median regional salary? I can understand why you’d want to have that. I can’t understand why anyone thinks that’s a reasonable expectation. I can’t understand why anyone seriously thinks it’s a waste of money — how much of TransLink’s budget was going to salary at all? It’s a complete populist firestorm – one might say Trumpian even.
They fired a bunch of managers and didn’t replace them. Maybe quality over quantity is better.
What do the Ministry of Transport execs, senior transport engineers, road construction contractors get for pumping out roading specifications, jersey barrier details and cloverleaf designs for Elephants like the Port Mann and Massey monster bridges?
Managers making more than 100K per year, that’s a problem? I earned more than 100K per year as a computer programmer with no management responsibility. Really, let’s have less carping at what management is paid and more pointing at real problems which actually require solutions.
A popular narrative can have little to do with the truth, or doing what is right to create a healthier more efficient city.
“Someone has to make a decision. You’ll never get to consensus on everything.”
Yeah, jeez, good point. Who did we elect to make decisions again?
That’s why you’ll find that the projects that get built the fastest are those pushed through by government – consensus isn’t necessarily a good thing.
– i.e.
Socred provincial gov’t – Expo Line SkyTrain (despite objections from Vancouver City Council)
NDP provincial gov’t – Millennium Line as SkyTrain (replacing LRT) (objections from Burnaby)
Liberal provincial gov’t – Canada Line
Liberal provincial gov’t – Evergreen Line as SkyTrain (replacing LRT) (objections from Port Moody)
VV city council – various bike lanes
VV city council – Burrard Bridge reconfiguration
VV city council – Robson St. closure
Well you’re never going to get consensus on anything, the whole notion that you can is pretty naive.
I just wish the Libs would just come out and own their actions. Want to build highways all over? Great, just admit to and let’s move on. It’s this dithering that’s the worst.
Burnaby and other municipalities also objected to the Canada Line, as it jumped Evergreen in the queue. (Having lived in a 90s building in Coquitlam with a map in the lobby showing the supposedly soon-to-come rapid transit line, I understand why. Though I emailed Burnaby council asking them not to turn down the Canada Line when funding was on offer.)
TransLink’s biggest problem is Jordan Bateman’s mouth.
I agree. It was Jordan Bateman and the people who believed what he said and didn;t know how good TransLink really was because they never used it.
How did Jordan blow you out of the water with less than 300th of what you had to spend?
Everyone loves a David and Goliath story. The little guy wins. They fought City Hall and won!
He “won”, we all lost.
Because lies that people want to hear trump the truth that is difficult to understand.
Because the majority who don’t use transit can’t see the benefit to themselves of good transit.
Because Bateman was given $millions in free media exposure.
Because increases in taxes are always a tough sell.
Because the myth that vehicle owners subsidize transit remains strong.
Because people are generally lazy.
I’m prettysure there was a consensus, it was called everything voted for in the ‘Yes’ vote.
Now we have the same thing with ICBC:
You can go on defending generous salaries that are not easily found in the private sector, especially when the lavish benefits are also factored in but the public are not amused with these one-percenters.
http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/british-columbia/number-of-icbc-workers-making-more-than-150k-has-more-than-doubled-in-10-years-says-ndp-1.3563373