While public transport is having a difficult time, instead of supporting it as it should, Minister Geneviève Guilbault is cutting off their funds.
Some people point out that public transit agencies have not regained their pre-pandemic ridership. However, was ridership in 2019 – which was a peak – really optimal? It would be a good accounting approach to simply analyze the number of trips; in an economic analysis, the quality of service also matters.
How many times have you heard people say: “On public transport, we’re all a handful”? It was not uncommon to wait for two trains on the orange line during rush hour or to have to gain momentum to board.
We could therefore rather consider that we have reached a healthier balance, but now transport agencies, such as the STM, are struggling to make ends meet. The mistake we make with transit agencies is that we view them as businesses that must serve their customers. Make no mistake: clientelism can be beneficial in improving the quality of service. However, when faced with unfair competition, such as a government massively funding the road system while charging pennies from its users – the gas tax doesn’t cover everything – it becomes difficult to set a price fair.
Indeed, when you use Quebec roads, you only pay for the wear and tear of your car, not that of the road; However, when you use public transit, you not only pay for the wear and tear of your boots, but also the wear and tear of the network. In Quebec and Lévis, each dollar paid by a citizen for their car transportation costs the government nearly $5.77, while this ratio is only $1 compared to $1.21 for public transit users.
Grow, but equal grow as they say.
Besides this inequity, if we really wanted to make the STM profitable we could simply increase the student fare to $100-200, or even $300-400 per month in winter. Such a rate would ensure that all the social surplus obtained from its least elastic clientele: students who cannot afford a car. Of course, such a scenario would be absurd, but that’s what a company aiming for profitability would do…
It is clear that transport companies are under financial strain. However, they strive to provide consistent quality service, pandemic or not. The frequency of these services is crucial, as many jobs – especially those performed by our guardian angels – cannot be done remotely. If we want to offer them a reliable, affordable and sustainable alternative, this is the only option.
To support transit agencies while addressing the housing crisis, it would be wise to increase density near subway stations. Substantially reducing administrative burdens for new property developments in these sectors could certainly help. In order to promote equity, it would be equally essential to develop more social housing there.
This strategy, beneficial for the construction sector currently in slow motion, would also accentuate the economic impact of transport on new construction, as evidenced by the excitement around the REM in Brossard. Note also that, although the city, residents and builders benefit greatly, these profits are not found in the coffers of the transport companies which are struggling.
In summary, public transport suffers from unfair competition and has revenues limited by its pricing measures. Conversely, they must maintain a good quality of services, firstly for their survival in order to avoid a death spiral, but also to ensure sustainable mobility for the Quebec population.
Transportation companies should no longer be seen as businesses seeking profitability, but rather as essential services, deserving of investment just like education and our other vital infrastructure.