01 -44 RENEW MAY-JUNE25 PT - Flipbook - Page 15
transit diesel bus for an electric on reduces human health
costs by $150,000 (USD) per year.”
And increasingly, considerations such as hidden
healthcare costs and quality of living are not lost on
politicians like Gower. “It’s about the air that our kids
breathe, that folks with asthma are breathing. It makes a
real di昀昀erence because these are vehicles that are moving
all day long on local streets. So it’s really important.”
Our convenience truth
Gower says that establishing and expanding Ottawa’s
Rapid Route Network is also critical to winning
commuters over, as part of the city’s e昀昀orts to reduce
gridlock, improve air quality and foster greater support
for transit investments.
“We have some corridors with
dedicated bus lanes that run right
alongside tra昀케c from our suburbs
into the city. And I think a real selling
point for transit is when people
might be sitting in gridlock in their
cars.” However that’s still more likely
to happen on a snowy winter day
whereas the rest of the time he admits
“the work commute in your car is
(still) faster than public transit.”
From Environmental Defense’s
perspective, that convenience gap between cars and transit
won’t change until more funds are allocated for service.
Which in turn would address the previously cited gap in
Canada of using public transit 40 per cent less than other
OECD countries.
Nate Wallace, the Program Manager, Clean
Transportation for Environmental Defense observes that
in numerous studies associated with ramping up ridership
growth “number one is service… then housing density is
number two… and then number three is prices, gas prices
and fare prices.”
Speci昀椀c to service, Wallace says that in the course of
researching the Putting Wheels on the Bus report, it was
determined that while doubling public transit ridership
by 2035 is achievable, “it will take the federal government
getting signi昀椀cantly involved in operations funding… as
well as cost sharing with the provinces. The costs on the
federal side would be approximately $3 billion per year…
but that sum is about a half a percentage point of federal
spending.”
The return on that investment says Wallace would be to
“make the buses and trains come more often on time. The
biggest core driver of getting people to switch to public
transit… is when they can rely on it.”
Wallace says service funding cuts have become our
new normal since the pandemic and as a consequence
“we’re seeing a lot of sort of downward spiral situations
in di昀昀erent cities across the country.” Including cities
where there are “an estimated 1700 (new buses) that
could be in service across the country… because cities are
昀椀scally constrained on the operating side. So we have this
exploding spare ratio.”
Underscoring that observation, a Toronto Star story from
last year reported that during peak periods, 551 buses,
81 street cars and 40 subway trains were not being used.
Vehicles “just sitting in empty storage yards, waiting to
ful昀椀ll their transit destiny.”
The end of the line
In search of 昀椀nding the right balance of 昀椀nancing…
service, maintenance and infrastructure expansion, some
of the answers can be found in the recently produced
This is the End of the Line: Reconstructing Transit Operating
Funding in Canada report by David Cooper, principal of the
transportation planning 昀椀rm Leading Mobility.
In addressing challenges ranging from unprecedented
population growth from immigration, the report
highlights the critical role adequately funded transit could
have on the future growth and prosperity of this country.
”Make the buses and trains come more often on time.
The biggest core driver of getting people to switch to
public transit… is when they can rely on it.”
RENEWCANADA.NET
Solutions that potentially include: providing a昀昀ordable,
convenient alternative transit so that Canadians
(especially newcomers) are less reliant on cars, reducing
tra昀케c congestion, reducing GHGs and supporting
economic growth by making it easier for commuters to
access employment, commercial areas, healthcare and
educational institutions.
The starting point in terms of policy recommendations
is the federal government should establish a national
commission tasked with developing a new model for
transit operating funding “that is more resilient and
equitable by relying less on regressive or declining
revenue sources such as fuel taxes, fares and property
taxes,” because “public transit needs to be recognized
as an essential service in the country by all levels of
governments.”
While not the sole answer, one alternative revenue
generating model that has been embraced in the U.K., is to
implement a variety of road network charges… including
congestion pricing.
Of course here in Canada, where there has been a
signi昀椀cant amount of pushback to the carbon tax (whether
justi昀椀able or not) and in the case of Ontario’s provincial
government—the desire to rip up Toronto’s bike lanes
whether the city wants it or not, it remains to be seen
whether there will be an appetite for such measures as
congestion pricing.
Yet another reality that further complicates the future of
public transit funding in this country as a Globe and Mail
story earlier this year pointed out, is that “mayors whose
cities have received millions in public transit funding
commitments from the federal government are worried
that political upheaval in Ottawa could jeopardize support
for the much-needed investments.”
MAY/JUNE 2025 – RENEW CANADA 15
