6 ms·

British Columbia's social democratic NDP government quickly stepped in with their own bus service to serve the north though I'm not sure if it's intended to be

British Columbia's social democratic NDP government quickly stepped in with their own bus service to serve the north though I'm not sure if it's intended to be permanent. https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/british-columbia/bc-northern-bus-transit-may-2018-1.4683199 https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/british-columbia/bc-northern-... It could make sense for the government to step in here with a publicly owned transit service if there is a real market failure here in that it's not at all profitable to serve the sparsely populated North.

GhostVII 8y ago
It sounds like it isn't designed to be permanent: "'This is an interim solution to cover the loss of Greyhound while we work with communities,' said Transportation Minister Claire Trevena, who said B.C. Transit would be spending $2 million to operate the service starting June 4." I'm kind of surprised they aren't making it permanent though - $2 million seems pretty cheap, and making it government-run ensures it won't be taken away again.
- uiri 8y ago
  making it government-run ensures it won't be taken away again. It only ensures that it won't be taken away again until the next time the province elects a majority Tory government.
  - BeeOnRope 8y ago
    To be fair, it has been about 90 years since the last time the Tories were elected in BC, and with no functioning Tory party in BC it doesn't seem like that will happen again any time soon.
    - vkou 8y ago
      In BC, the Tories call themselves the "BC Liberal" (In-name only) party. Their policies are very similar to the federal CPC.
      - BeeOnRope 8y ago
        The BC liberal party is indeed kind of a philosophical blend between the federal liberals and the federal conservatives (more like the liberals on social and environmental issues, but more like the conservatives on fiscal issues) - but no, nobody calls the BC liberal party "the Tories".
- geezerjay 8y ago
  > I'm kind of surprised they aren't making it permanent though - $2 million seems pretty cheap, and making it government-run ensures it won't be taken away again. Government programs start small like a foot in the door. Then they start to grow due to their very nature (provide a service with no regard for cost or return, if town B has a service then town D is also entitled to one, etc) and the argument is always that their service is indispensible. Then of course the interests of those working for the state-controlled company also play a role, and the existence of the service starts to become a political sticking point that syphons millions each year and piles o millions more in debt.
robertAngst 8y ago
>It could make sense for the government to step in here with a publicly owned transit service if there is a real market failure here in that it's not at all profitable to serve the sparsely populated North. If its unprofitable, maybe its a bad idea to have unused transportation. While a few buses seem like negligible damage to the environment, I imagine this greater plan is to grow these locations that are in unfavorable geographic locations. Isnt this environmentally irresponsible?
- qjighap 8y ago
  Given the typical vehicle up here in the North, if the bus has even a few people on it probably is an environmental win. Generally if a person is needed up here then a person will go down and get that person and return with them. Cars are less common than trucks and a "small" truck is a 1/4 ton. Additionally, the greyhound is a popular shipping choice for industry because of the time to ship. Most of the packages/mail gets sorted in Vancouver and then returns back up to Prince George. Putting on the Greyhound and it getting to where it needs to go next day was amazing. Shipping times were often better from Alberta and BC with the major players since the package didn't have to double back. Hotshot services are typically field based, but it isn't rare for somebody to hot shot packages between cities since it can take days through other methods now.
- ethbro 8y ago
  The article points out that some people have to live there due to local employment. Having unsustainably small communities is probably less environmentally friendly than growing them to a size where not all services / materials need to be individually imported.
  - deleted 8y ago
    [deleted]
- rtpg 8y ago
  The fire department isn't profitable. Still a good idea to have it. Army's not profitable. Sidewalks aren't profitable. Don't get me started on libraries... What's the point of money if we're only going to use it to make more of it?

GhostVII 8y ago

It sounds like it isn't designed to be permanent: "'This is an interim solution to cover the loss of Greyhound while we work with communities,' said Transportation Minister Claire Trevena, who said B.C. Transit would be spending $2 million to operate the service starting June 4." I'm kind of surprised they aren't making it permanent though - $2 million seems pretty cheap, and making it government-run ensures it won't be taken away again.

uiri 8y ago
making it government-run ensures it won't be taken away again. It only ensures that it won't be taken away again until the next time the province elects a majority Tory government.
- BeeOnRope 8y ago
  To be fair, it has been about 90 years since the last time the Tories were elected in BC, and with no functioning Tory party in BC it doesn't seem like that will happen again any time soon.
  - vkou 8y ago
    In BC, the Tories call themselves the "BC Liberal" (In-name only) party. Their policies are very similar to the federal CPC.
    - BeeOnRope 8y ago
      The BC liberal party is indeed kind of a philosophical blend between the federal liberals and the federal conservatives (more like the liberals on social and environmental issues, but more like the conservatives on fiscal issues) - but no, nobody calls the BC liberal party "the Tories".
geezerjay 8y ago
> I'm kind of surprised they aren't making it permanent though - $2 million seems pretty cheap, and making it government-run ensures it won't be taken away again. Government programs start small like a foot in the door. Then they start to grow due to their very nature (provide a service with no regard for cost or return, if town B has a service then town D is also entitled to one, etc) and the argument is always that their service is indispensible. Then of course the interests of those working for the state-controlled company also play a role, and the existence of the service starts to become a political sticking point that syphons millions each year and piles o millions more in debt.

robertAngst 8y ago

>It could make sense for the government to step in here with a publicly owned transit service if there is a real market failure here in that it's not at all profitable to serve the sparsely populated North. If its unprofitable, maybe its a bad idea to have unused transportation. While a few buses seem like negligible damage to the environment, I imagine this greater plan is to grow these locations that are in unfavorable geographic locations. Isnt this environmentally irresponsible?

qjighap 8y ago
Given the typical vehicle up here in the North, if the bus has even a few people on it probably is an environmental win. Generally if a person is needed up here then a person will go down and get that person and return with them. Cars are less common than trucks and a "small" truck is a 1/4 ton. Additionally, the greyhound is a popular shipping choice for industry because of the time to ship. Most of the packages/mail gets sorted in Vancouver and then returns back up to Prince George. Putting on the Greyhound and it getting to where it needs to go next day was amazing. Shipping times were often better from Alberta and BC with the major players since the package didn't have to double back. Hotshot services are typically field based, but it isn't rare for somebody to hot shot packages between cities since it can take days through other methods now.
ethbro 8y ago
The article points out that some people have to live there due to local employment. Having unsustainably small communities is probably less environmentally friendly than growing them to a size where not all services / materials need to be individually imported.
- deleted 8y ago
  [deleted]
rtpg 8y ago
The fire department isn't profitable. Still a good idea to have it. Army's not profitable. Sidewalks aren't profitable. Don't get me started on libraries... What's the point of money if we're only going to use it to make more of it?