innsertnamehere
Superstar
it still includes HST hikes however, just smaller.
|
|
|
New Transit Funding Sources
- Thread starter denfromoakvillemilton
- Start date
mrxbombastic
Active Member
A combination of a 25c Parking Levy ($350M), Corporate Tax ($190M), Gas Tax ($330M) and 0.5% HST increase ($770M), and Development Charges ($100M) would be the most palpable IMO
Let's hope the budget passes with the NDP just abstaining at worst. The lack of a position or ideas coming from the ONDP is both staggering and frustrating at the same time.
Let's hope the budget passes with the NDP just abstaining at worst. The lack of a position or ideas coming from the ONDP is both staggering and frustrating at the same time.
innsertnamehere
Superstar
you are still cutting it a bit short on change there, thats only $1.74 billion annually. bring it to $0.07 gas tax (460 million), and a $0.35 parking tax, and you are good.
denfromoakvillemilton
Senior Member
Member Bio
- Joined
- Apr 30, 2008
- Messages
- 7,448
- Reaction score
- 1,513
- Location
- Downtown Toronto, Ontario
1.5 increase in the HST and 50c for parking. Get as much as you can now.
kEiThZ
Superstar
Palpable or palatable? And palatable to whom? I think such measure could well bring down the government. I agree with the taxes. But I don't see a politically feasible path for a minority government.
kEiThZ
Superstar
That would all but guarantee the election of the Conservatives.
Raising the HST would be particularly egregious. For two reasons. 1) It's highly visible and thus most offensive to most. 2) In places like Ottawa, where they are paying a third of their transit costs and bearing all operational costs, they are already hopping mad that they didn't get the deal that Toronto did. Having to pay even more HST is simply adding insult to injury.
I'd go for all sorts of other measures that can be more hidden. Plate taxes. Corporate taxes. Parking taxes. Fuel taxes. Development charges. Property taxes. Etc. All less visible and less likely to cause a backlash.
TOareaFan
Superstar
Great article.
I've been hoping that the bravado coming from the NDP is just in an attempt to "negotiate" a deal with the Liberals on this issue. That is to say, to end up supporting the taxes, but not after claiming some kind of victory in the process. Saying "yes" doesn't distinguish the NDP from the Liberals, but saying "no, unless..." has the potential to.
Either that, or she'll actually put this populist crap into action (or inaction), and then we're all screwed.
Johnny Au
Senior Member
Wow. The NDP did decay. They are becoming like the Labour under Tony Blair.
Last edited:
innsertnamehere
Superstar
TOareaFan
Superstar
Please do not take this as any defense of the Hudak plan but I think it is right to point out that the report may not be coming from a totally objective source. Their regional director for Ontario (likely the author or key contributor to this review) was selected by Ms Wynne to be part of the Golden Panel so....
In fact if you look at the very first category "Rapid Transit for the whole Region"......She gives Ms Wynne a "green bus" (the highest ranking) and Ms Horwath a gold bus (2nd ranking) even though in this category they have promised the exact same thing! I guess the fact that the Liberals have presided over the first $16B in spending on the Big Move is the tie breaker but I hardly think that Ms Horwath could have done that part as, after all, she was not the premier.
I do find it funny in that category that Hudak is criticized for wanting to spend more money on a shorter plan just to get things underground.....isn't that exactly what the Liberals ended up supporting to replace the RT?
muller877
Senior Member
Now that we have a large-scale PPP in Ontario (KW LRT), has anyone done any comparisons with estimates for similar proposed projects in the GTA (e.g. Finch LRT & Mississauga LRT)? I know some people have support or objections to PPP on a political basis but if we just do the numbers I was wondering which one wins out in the end.
As I understand it, PPP costs more due to moving risk to the private sector, private sector can run it more efficiently and public sector quite often has cost over-runs....I was wondering how these factors balance out in the end.
And for this purpose, we can ignore the City of Toronto fair wage policies since the projects are controlled by Metrolinx.
As I understand it, PPP costs more due to moving risk to the private sector, private sector can run it more efficiently and public sector quite often has cost over-runs....I was wondering how these factors balance out in the end.
And for this purpose, we can ignore the City of Toronto fair wage policies since the projects are controlled by Metrolinx.
innsertnamehere
Superstar
Horwath probably got a lower score as her funding scheme is a whole lot more shaky. Hudak's underground plan overbuilds a lot of infrastructure, specifically eglinton and sheppard. the point is not that he sticks the same amount of transit underground, but rather than he sticks a much smaller amount of transit underground and it still costs more.
Also Eglinton is a PPP from my understanding.
Also Eglinton is a PPP from my understanding.
Last edited:
TOareaFan
Superstar
Funding plan was a different category and, strangely, the Libs and the NDP got the same score.
muller877
Senior Member
http://www.ttc.ca/About_the_TTC/Com.../November_18/Reports/Yonge-Eglinton_and_E.pdf
As I understand it, Eglington is only an AFP (private build and financing). A true PPP would make the builder also responsible for operations (which on Eglington is the TTC). The city/province would specify the conditions of operating (state of good repair, annual subsidy, frequency of service, etc) and the operator would have penalties if they did not maintain the quality of service.