The Extra Point Try: The Tenth Point Of The Nine Point Plan

Is the real border story finally coming out, even though it is only one step at a time?

What would Windsorites ever do without John Fairley and Face-to-Face! Where else do we get politicians telling us the truth and not even knowing that they are putting their foot in their mouth as John raises that eye-brow of his. Was Alan Rock, the former Infrastructure Minister in the Liberal Government, the latest victim?

Oh the memories. The infamous Nine Point Plan from May, 2003. How we in Windsor hated it, remember. Rock helped bring it in and he still likes it too.

But you know what, as time went on over the border fiasco, some of us wondered if we were really being dealt with fairly or whether a decision had already been made and DRIC was nothing more than the justification for what had already been decided.

Let's speculate. Did ex-Minister Rock let us know that there was a Tenth Point that was never revealed until John's show. Were we right after all?

In case you have forgotten, here is a summary of the "public" Nine Points:

The Governments of Canada and Ontario have agreed upon the following nine point plan:

1. Province will assume full responsibility for E.C. Row Expressway between Lauzon Parkway and Ojibway Parkway, and will widen it by one lane in each direction.
   
2. Province will assume full responsibility for Lauzon Parkway south of E.C. Row Expressway and will extend/upgrade the highway from Highway 401 to E.C. Row.
   
3. Work together with the City of Windsor and Town of LaSalle on improvements to Highway 3/Huron Church Road, including the grade separation of the Tecumseh Road intersection north of E.C. Row Expressway, pedestrian overpasses at key locations and the grade separation of all major intersections between Highway 401 and E.C. Row Expressway to improve the flow of traffic and enhance the safety of residents.
4. Work together with proponents, the Canadian Transit Company (Ambassador Bridge) and the Detroit River Tunnel Partnership in their efforts to build connections to the border crossings, concurrent with the Bi-National Planning Process.
   
5. Work together with partner agencies to accelerate the Bi-National Planning Process, and work with all proponents of new border crossing capacity, including the Canadian Transit Company (Ambassador Bridge), the Detroit River Tunnel Partnership and Mich-Can, in the context of this process.
6. Seek the City of Windsor's commitment that it will put in place arrangements to support the redevelopment of Windsor-Detroit tunnel plaza to meet the growing needs of the Windsor-Detroit community.
   
7. Promote the development of commercial vehicle pre-processing and staging areas to expedite and improve the flow of trucks across the border.
8. Develop and implement a plan for the deployment of technology that will facilitate the flow of traffic and enhance access to the border.
9. Work in cooperation with City of Windsor, Town of LaSalle, Town of Tecumseh, County of Essex and any other municipality affected by this plan.

Now that we don't have to worry about DRTP any more (It has lost the "Rail to Fails" battle when a gutless City Council refused to even talk about a tunnel in its corridor or anywhere in Windsor), the Nine Point Plan does not look so bad. With a bit of tweaking here and there, it is quite workable. Perhaps this is the real legacy of DRTP. Its invasive role in Windsor has delayed a proper resolution of the border issue for years!

You know, it would not surprise me to see Eddie adopt now a variation of that Plan and call it his own. Is that why tunnelling had to die? After all, Windsor cannot afford to upgrade E C Row on our own. Interestingly, his discussion with Minister Cansfield was about airports, rail and the border.

Hmmmmm. As an aside, why was he talking to a Provincial Minister about federal matters? Obviously to create a "transportation hub vision" for the next Provincial election. Let's call it Son of Sam Report. You know what, all of those projects would need an upgraded E C Row. So maybe there were some preliminary talks about a buy-in to an Eddie-Plan to upgrade E C Row by uploading it to the Province.

Anyway, back to former Minister Rock. Rock revealed that he and then Ontario Enterprise, Opportunity and Innovation Minister Flaherty had a deal on a Tenth Point, one that we never knew about.

Here is the Tenth Point: He reached an Agreement with Flaherty that each would contribute "X" number of dollars. They agreed to create the possibility of a new, third crossing with the Americans. He said that they would NOT be twinning the bridge but there would be a separate crossing.

Rock saw Flaherty who is now Canada's Minister of Finance in New York recently and told him not to forget the Plan "we cooked up" for the border crossing. Now Rock realizes that changes are necessary to accommodate local concerns but basically he still thinks it is a good plan.

In answer to John's question again that the twinned bridge is not a reality, Rock said at the time, the better plan was to build a third crossing.

In passing, one wonders if Rock is an emissary for Windsor now? After all his law firm works for the City doesn't it and they have received some nice sized fees over the past few years. Will Eddie phone up the Federal Finance Minister after Rock smooths the way and ask for help? Help first for the Tunnel obviously and then for the new crossing. Stay tuned!

Now doesn't this tell you something. The Feds and Province had already agreed on a new crossing in 2003. Don't forget the Bi-National process was really just starting and had years and millions to spend to come to that conclusion.

It was not until January, 2004 when the Bi-national Partnership produced a final Planning/Need and Feasibility (P/NF) Study Report that identified the Central crossing and the Ambassador Bridge as the best two locations. DRIC really got started after the Environmental Assessment Terms of Reference was approved by the Ontario Minister of the Environment in September, 2004

Kind of makes a mockery of the DRIC process if you are the Ambassador Bridge Co. (or even DRTP) if I am right. They never had a chance of being successful if the decision had been made already in early 2003.

The Governments at the time said:

• "The Windsor Gateway Action Plan complements the Canada-Ontario-United States-Michigan Bi-National Partnership Planning Process currently underway to develop a longer-term strategy for the Windsor-Detroit Gateway. The Governments of Canada and Ontario continue to support the bi-national process which will address the longer-term capacity requirements for the Windsor-Detroit Gateway. Canada and Ontario will work with all proponents for new border capacity within the context of the bi-national planning process."

Was that true? It appears as if a decision had already been made for a third crossing.

If the decision was made, then why was there the need for DRIC? That should be obvious: there was a need to slow down the Bridge Co.'s plans for a twinned bridge. Keep them in the process as long as possible while planning took place on such items as passing Bill C-3, doing the engineering work for the third crossing, lining up financing, trying to get a Presidential permit etc. DRTP needed to be kept around too to stir things up as they so nicely did.

Now I think I understand why a "broad" EA was undertaken notwithstanding that Ontario's Court of Appeal said that a "scoped" one could have been done. More time-wasting. I was specifically told:

• "the Minister of Environment may approve a TOR that provides for a scoped environmental assessment if the Minister is satisfied that an environmental assessment prepared in accordance with the TOR will be consistent with the purpose of the EA Act and the public interest.
• However, the decision in the Richmond Landfill case does not require proponents to undertake scoping during preparation of a TOR. The proponent retains the ability to propose, in a TOR, the approach that the proponent wishes to take in the environmental assessment process. In this case, MTO made the decision, in consultation with the members of the bi-national transportation partnership, to propose a broad environmental assessment within which a full range of alternatives would be evaluated and that is what MOE approved."

But something about what Rock said bugged me. It was his choice of language. He is a lawyer, a Cabinet Minister and was Canada's Ambassador to the UN. He would use words very precisely. He used the expression:

"Create the possibility of a third crossing".

He talked about upgrades to E C Row and to widen access to the bridge on Huron Church. Now those are costly matters for mere short-term needs. That sounded to me like traffic solutions for the long-term, as the Fed's consultant Cansult suggested. It also suggested to me a route to the the existing bridge, not some new crossing

Eureka, I thought that there was another Tenth Point. To me, what the real Tenth Point in the Nine Point Plan was to pretend to create a new crossing, but really put pressure on the Bridge Co. to force them to sell out. Why else build costly roads to the bridge "short-term."

That is why Rock used the word "possibility!" They were creating the possibility of a new crossing but did not really want one. After all, hundreds of millions were spent on the Ambassdor Gateway project on the US side and the Bridge Co. has already spent $500M to buy property for the new bridge over the past decade. Why not use all of that rather than moving a new crossing a mile downriver at a cost of billions!

How was pressure imposed: by eliminating them from DRIC, passing Bill C-3, hold them up on their EA amongst other matters. Who knows if the Interim Control By-law which supposedly holds things up for up to two years to be followed by a Heritage designation is not part of this too as Windsor's contribution. Nothing would surprise me now.

Pressuring the Ambassador Bridge would result in their objective being reached: to force the owner to sell out to the Governments for fear of being put out of business. What choice would he be given but to knuckle under to the all-powerful Governments. After all, the threat of a Government P3 bridge with heavily subsidized tolls, a mandatory marshalling yard on Highway 401 to direct traffic (Rock mentioned a "staging area" on Fairley's show as well), no trucks on Huron Church Road, a new DRIC Road to a new bridge and being controlled under Bill C-3 are pretty scary propositions

After all, the thought is that he is a smart man who does not want to see his valuable asset reduced in value and then bankrupted so he will sell out now and at a price that is lower than he could get in the market-place but still a nice package. After all, no one would want an asset that can be negatively impactd by a Government crossing.

Accordingly, the Govenrment would buy it at a much reduced price and then when the costs come in from DRIC that show that the new crossing will costs billions, why the other best crossing from the P/NF study will be used instead: the twinned Ambassador Bridge! Just like with the twinned Blue Water bridge. With a widened Huron Church road (DRIC Road) and an upgraded E C Row as well.

Heck that would service the new East End Arena too wouldn't it and the transportation hub that Eddie is now talking about with the Ontario Transportation Minister? She builds the roads...perhaps she might upload E C Row and do a deal on Brighton Beach after all for Lauzon/E C Row as in the Nine-Point Plan as I suggested a long time before!

Have we all been made to look like chumps by backstage political machinations for all of these years? Have we been fed a bunch of BS? What is the truth? Will we ever find out?

Now if I could figure this out, I am sure the Bridge Co. can too. If so, then I suspect that the Extra Point in the Nine Point Plan will be blocked and will be No Good!