You wouldn’t have a little 2.5 billion to take the bus?

It is not normal that public transport companies are always begging to keep their activities running.

But how could you expect it to be otherwise? They were placed in an impossible situation. So, don’t ask yourself why there is a 2.5 billion hole in their budget for the next five years.

In 2018, Quebec had the ambition to increase the public transport offer by 5% per year to reduce its greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions. Very good.

To finance everything, the government then launched a project led by the Ministry of Transport which met more than 240 partners, reviewed 58 briefs and produced a report in 2021 containing 14 avenues¹.

And since then… nothing.

For transportation companies, the equation is broken.

For around twenty years, the fares paid by users have covered around a third of the operating costs of transport companies. The provincial and municipal governments each paid another third of the bill, roughly speaking.

But with the addition of expensive new infrastructure, users can no longer be asked to cover a third of operating costs. The prices would become prohibitive.

For the REM de l’Ouest, for example, the rates resulting from excess ridership will only cover approximately 10% of the operating costs related to the REM.

So, the bill is overflowing in Quebec and the cities.

We will have the same issue with the blue line of the Montreal metro, the tramway in Quebec, the electrification of buses…

This is a structural problem that existed long before COVID-19 caused ridership and fare revenue to plummet, giving transportation companies even more headaches.

After rescuing them during the pandemic, Quebec only wants to finance 20% of the deficit for the next few years. Tighten your belt, Transport Minister Geneviève Guilbault has just suggested to transport companies.

Of course, we are all for optimization. But there are limits to cutting expenses without reducing the frequency of service, which would reduce ridership even further.

Let’s avoid this vicious circle. To finance the green transition, let us instead focus on the eco-tax accelerator, which remains underused in Quebec, since it represents 1.6% of GDP, compared to 2% for the OECD.².

How to do it ?

The minimum would be to index existing measures.

For example, in 1992, Quebec introduced a $30 contribution payable on registration renewal, in regions where there is public transportation. This contribution, which brought in 90 million in 2021-2022, would make it possible to raise 150 million, if it had been indexed.

And then, the provincial tax of 19 cents on fuel has not been indexed since 2013. If it had kept up with inflation, Quebec would collect 273 million more per year. After 10 years of inertia, it is time to make up for lost ground.

A 3-cent gas tax is also collected in the Montreal region to finance regional public transportation. By raising it to 5 cents, we could collect 57 million more. Other regions could also take advantage of this possibility.

That said, the fuel tax is expected to decrease with the rise of electric vehicles. In the medium term, we should therefore consider replacing it with a kilometer tax, such as The Press has already pleaded³.

What else ? We could consider a tax on large non-residential parking lots, a doubly advantageous approach.

First, it would make it possible to raise money to finance public transport by taxing spaces that encourage automobile travel. For example, a tax of 50 cents per working day, on some three million commercial and institutional parking spaces, would bring in annual revenues of 375 million in Quebec. This tax would also encourage better use of land, allowing urban densification favorable to active travel.

Add it up: we’re at almost 800 million per year! This is more than enough to plug the deficit of public transport companies.

But let’s not dream in colors. In interview with The Pressat the beginning of September, Finance Minister Eric Girard told us that he did not like any of the eco-fiscal measures presented to him.

We understand that the Coalition Avenir Québec (CAQ) does not want to displease motorists who have little desire to pay more, especially those who live in regions where there is little public transportation.

But this money would also come back to them, because it would make it possible to replenish the chronic deficit of the Land Transport Network Fund (FORT), which finances both public transport and the road network.⁴.

Let’s be clear, the status quo is untenable. We cannot continue to drive in the red, both for the maintenance of roads which are falling into disrepair and for the operation of public transport which is essential to the fight against climate change which affects us all.