PHOTO DAVID BOILY, THE PRESS
“It’s hard to ask more from users who already pay 30% of the costs,” writes Nathalie Collard.
Like the groundhog emerging from its hole in the spring, the debate on the financing of public transport invariably comes up in the news.
Posted yesterday at 5:00 a.m.
This week, the mayoress of Montreal, Valérie Plante, also president of the Metropolitan Community of Montreal (CMM), asked the two orders of government to help the municipalities absorb the deficit of their transport system. A deficit caused among other things by the drop in traffic during the pandemic.
The CMM has taxation powers to finance public transport. In 2019, it had also passed a resolution which reduced the registration tax from $45 to $50 on the island of Montreal in addition to imposing a tax of $50 in the suburbs. Total of this measure: 275 million. A sum that never materialized, however, due to an obsolete computer system at the SAAQ, which asks to wait until… 2024.
Last week, it was the turn of the resigning general manager of the Société de transport de Montréal, Luc Tremblay, to draw attention to the STM’s structural funding problems.
Year after year, it’s the same tune: transport companies have to practically get on their knees to implore governments about the importance of stable and recurring funding. That we are still here in 2022, in the midst of the climate crisis, is demoralizing.
Since it bears repeating, let’s repeat it: the needs of transport companies are glaring. There is maintenance (the Montreal metro is 55 years old). And there is the development of the offer. We can’t cut corners on either one if we want to have a transport network worthy of the 21st century.and century.
Add to this that the post-pandemic period may result in a drop in traffic linked to telework and therefore, in another potential drop in income. However, almost at the same time, it will be necessary to adapt to the aging of the population, which will surely create new demands: fewer trips at rush hour and more trips within the same territory.
It’s hard to ask more from users who already pay 30% of the costs. The municipalities – which assume another 30% – are also at the end of their ability to pay. There are still the two orders of government.
The Quebec Ministry of Transport has in its hands a study led by the MP for Beauharnois, Claude Reid. The project on the financing of sustainable mobility explores various sources of financing available to the government to finance public transport in the perspective where the gas tax will become obsolete in the next twenty years. The MTQ is giving itself until 2023 to study the impacts. It’s really looooong.
When we know that this reflection began in 2019, we are entitled to ask, as Mayor Plante did this week, to press the accelerator.
Let’s not forget that in the expression “climate emergency” there is urgency, a word that seems to be misunderstood at the other end of Highway 20.
We know it’s never very popular to talk about new taxes, even if it’s for a very good reason. It must be said that spending on public transport is very visible, while the cost of using the car is hidden.
Perhaps we should remember that a sum allocated to the development and maintenance of public transport is not an expense, but an investment. And that the privilege of using a car is expensive for all of society: pollution, delays caused by congestion, road maintenance, costs related to road accidents, urban sprawl, etc. When we compare the column of advantages and that of disadvantages, it is obvious that there is an imbalance and an inequity. It is high time to fix it.