|
A new vision for surface transportation policy in Canada....
Chris Jones makes the case for greater investment in
transportation infrastructure and a renewed commitment to
transportation alternatives that would improve living conditions
in many of Canada's urban areas
The author would like to state that the views expressed
above are entirely his own and are not endorsed by any organization
with which he is affiliated in a professional or other manner.
Mr. Jones holds a doctorate in political economy from Oxford
University and is presently employed in the government relations
field in Ottawa.
Gridlock, smog, congestion on our highways and at our major
border crossings have all become commonplace in contemporary
Canada. Canada's highly prized quality of life is increasingly
threatened by a set of dysfunctional public policies that
privilege the most fuel intensive and polluting modes of
transport. The tax and infrastructure policies of both national
and provincial levels of government encourage the use of
trucks for freight transportation and private automobiles
for commuting. In the absence of full cost accounting for
road use, the externalities generated by commercial vehicles
and cars (i.e. pavement rehabilitation, congestion, accidents,
noise and GHG and particulate matter emissions) are paid
for by the general public. Finally, land use and planning
policies aggravate a bad situation by permitting the construction
of new communities in which the private automobile is virtually
the only transport option.
In view of the exponential growth of two-way trade in the
wake of NAFTA, growing rates of private vehicle ownership,
and increases in personal mobility, the status quo in transport
is clearly unsustainable over the medium and longer term.A
progressive approach to surface transportation policy would
seek to eliminate the perverse incentives that encourage
both single occupant vehicle commuting and shipper reliance
on trucks for freight delivery. A new approach would be
founded on both sustainability and the need to correct the
serious modal imbalance that has become such a marked feature
of our current transportation sector. Such a policy would
have several goals:
* The preservation of our natural environment and the conservation
of our land base;
* The maintenance and improvement of human health and quality
of life in Canada's urban, suburban and rural communties;
* A reduction in emissions of both toxic and ozone-depleting
exhaust and a curtailment of road-generated noise; and
* The institution of a fiscally sane approach to public
expenditure in the transportation sector.
Such a policy would require the coordination of all three
levels of government in Canada. It would also require a
determination and political commitment, hitherto absent,
to change the "business as usual" approach in
the transport sector. It would mean, in effect, shaking
free the iron grip which the road construction and trucking
lobbies have developed in relation to provincial ministries
of transportation. Moreover, it would mean taking seriously
the implications of climate change and Canada's role as
a signatory to the revised Kyoto protocol.
Essential elements
A progressive approach to moving people and goods would
place a far greater reliance on commuter, intercity and
freight rail, bus and urban transit along with an enlightened
approach to zoning, residential planning and density issues.
The mindless and ecologically destructive pattern of suburban
sprawl must be halted and in its place should be erected
a new pattern of planning that marries land use and transportation
more rationally from the outset. In many circles, this is
now being described as "Smart Growth" but long-standing
European approaches to planning would be equally apposite.
Multi-use zoning would permit a greater mix of residential,
business, and recreational uses and help to dismantle traditional,
rigid barriers that have tended to encourage long, car-based
commuting and destructive patterns of land use.
The bullets below are by no means comprehensive but provide
some initial measures that would begin to address the problem:
* It is time to institute a system of full cost accounting
for road use whereby road users would be charged directly
on each trip for the cost of maintaining the road network
(infrastructure), as well as for the costs of congestion,
environmental damage and accident risks that their road
use imposes on others. A pilot user-pay system of the kind
recently introduced in London, England and already in existence
on highway 407 in Ontario would discourage non-essential
vehicle use. State of the art wireless and cash-less systems
exist already (i.e. transponder satellite tolling) and could
be readily introduced;
* Governments at all levels must begin to provide significant,
new and long-term funding for the construction of commuter
rail, light rail and transit infrastructure. This would
include funds for the construction and expansion of rights-of-way,
stations, bridges, grade separations, signalling, access
roads and other related infrastructure. All levels of governments
should make a contribution to the ongoing operating costs
of transit and rail systems in order to supplement revenues
obtained from the fare box;
* The tax imbalances (fuel and property) that skew shipper
choices towards the trucking mode must be corrected so that
freight rail is put on an equal footing. The massive, implicit
subsidy to commercial trucking, whereby trucks run over
publicly-funded highways at rates considerably below the
real cost of the damage they impose on the road system,
must be ended. Shippers opting to haul their goods by freight
rail or intermodal services - both of which are more environmentally
friendly than truck -- should receive some kind of tax credit
in view of the public interest benefits that obtain from
such choices.
* Infrastructure spending by transport and highway departments
throughout Canada should be allocated, in part, to support
intermodal facilities which are designed to take trucks
off the road, reduce pavement damage and thereby alleviate
the burden on the public treasury;
* Monthly transit/commuter rail passes should be tax deductible
in order to promote the use of such services;
* Governments should consider purchasing discontinued urban
rail corridors or other linear properties (i.e. hydro rights-of-way)
having fallen into disuse and hold these assets for future
commuter use as urban populations grow; and
* Transport Canada should be mandated to regulate all surface
modes of transport. At present, the Federal Government regulates
rail and marine operations while provincial governments
have regulatory oversight for trucking and bus operations.
Safety regimes and hours of service issues in the trucking
sector have become a tangled mess as a result of the patchwork
of provincial regulations.
Conclusion
Canada lags other G-7 industrial countries in not having
a central government presence in the provision of funding
for urban transit and commuter/light rail. Our surface transportation
policies are in many respects myopic and fail to contribute
to the kind of environmentally friendly, multi-modal and
seamless solutions that are so desperately needed at this
time. Transportation is intimately connected to quality
of life, stress and human health and implementing the kind
of progressive measures outlined above would begin the process
of enshrining these values in public policy.
Back to top
|
