Putting The Fun In Border Politics

I never knew how powerful this BLOG was until last Saturday's Star story. Read on as I demonstrate to you how much fun border politics is.

I got to thinking about the two Provincial Minister comedians we had in town the other day. I wanted to get a copy of the Infrastructure Minister's remarks. Not on his Ministry site or that of Infrastructure Ontario.

I wanted to see how newspapers other than the Star covered the story--nothing. That was so bizarre. A Minister comes all the way here and no coverage on such a big deal.

Then I got it. It was all a phony, designed by Dwight and Sandra to impress the home folks. Do you really think the Liberals want to scare investors by sounding like the NDP on public ownership. Nope the Star coverage was nothing more than to appeal to the local market, to pretend to be doing something when they have no authority to do anything since it is a Federal matter.

It smelled so similar to the phony Gong Show announcement of money to support Schwartz that was never really there. Do they think we are all that stupid not to see through their charade!

Oh and as for what we were told at the DRIC CCG meeting about a decision in June. Are they crazy....there is an election in October. Do you think Sandra and Dwight want to take a position that can get someone angry at them and cost them a vote in what may be a tough campaign. Forget that. Nope it's better to be able to say that they are respecting the DRIC process and would prefer not to make any comments until DRIC's report comes out, after the election.

And my good buddy, NDP Brian Masse. Well, talk about my BLOG beig powerful. I never really knew until he opened his mouth. Here I was thinking that a few local folks came here every so often to have a few chuckles.

Wow was I ever wrong. Here is part of what Brian said:

• "outside of here it [my BLOG] can confuse people and damage the city's reputation."

Don't you see, I have a huge readership outside of Windsor that reads my stuff and is influenced by it! Amazing. And my BLOG is so well-thought of that what I say confuses people and gives people the wrong impression about Windsor....like , yes there really are some people here who can think and who want to solve the border issue. That's something that even Brian can't do and he's an MP! At least until the next election.

Now I can say he must read my BLOG and learned something from it so he is accurate that way. He does not talk about the Ambassador Bridge tolls being higher than public tolls because the Cities-owned Tunnel's charges are higher than those of the privately owned bridge. Brian goes out of town now to make the comparison. I wonder too how Brian explains how the "public" Tunnel's volumes have dropped so much in so short a time in comparison with that of the private bridge.

Poor Brian likes talking about Fort Erie....Here is a recent story. It sounds like something a private operator would do to pay for improvements.

• "Peace Bridge tolls are likely to increase starting in April to help pay for the cost of building a second bridge and new U.S. plaza, bridge officials said Monday."

Their car tolls go up to $3 from $2.50 while truck tolls go up from $1 to $11, depending on the number of axles on a truck.

Brian had some comments in the House of Commons again in the House the other day. My comments are in bold. I truly hope that I do not mix up my vast out-of-town readership another time:

• Mr. Brian Masse (Windsor West, NDP):
  
  Mr. Speaker, it is a privilege to ask a question in the House of Commons. On December 7 I asked a question of the Minister of Transport, Infrastructure and Communities. I wanted to find out from the minister the position of the government on public versus private ownership of the Windsor-Detroit border. For those who are not aware, this is the busiest international trade corridor in North America. It is one that has a significant impact on the economy.
  
  Recently Citigroup, a financial institution and one that anyone could hardly suggest is a left leaning think tank, did a study on public versus private ownership of international bridges and tunnels. From that, it measured several different factors. It looked at interest rates, equity, corporate income tax and sales tax. The result of all those analyses was that private ownership would have a 35% to 40% increase in toll rates versus those of under public ownership. [Oh Brian, was this the one done for the "public" Peace Bridge. Check out on the Internet other reports Citigroup have done. Release it so we can see what else it says. So now when the Peace Bridge needs money, they can "borrow" it and raise tolls]
  
  Windsor and the surrounding area have four border crossings right now, with a mixture of ownership. One that is privately held has significantly higher tolls than even its competitors, for example, in Sault Ste. Marie, Sarnia, Fort Erie, Buffalo and also in the region. [The Cities-owned Detroit/Windsor Tunnel is higher Brian...don't forget!]
  
  As we move forward with a brand new border crossing in my region, our concern is that it be publicly owned and operated and that we ensure the lowest fares possible to add increased competition, but not tax the users too much. We all know about the manufacturing issues in Ontario right now. Being able to compete fairly with the international trade agreements coming into force is very concerning to manufacturers. We do not want to add an additional tax burden on the businesses currently there. [Brian, if the Ambassador Bridge is so expensive, why do so many trucks go there rather than cross at the public bridge in Sarnia? Could it be because they cross quicker at the Ambassador Bridge saving the truckers time and money?]
  
  I ask for a commitment from the parliamentary secretary's government that the next bridge crossing between Windsor and Detroit will be one publicly owned and operated, similar to others being built across the country.
  
  Mr. Brian Jean (Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Transport, Infrastructure and Communities, CPC):
  
  Mr. Speaker, I can assure the member that we will do what is in the best interest of Canadians and Canadian taxpayers, as well as residents in the Windsor area.
  
  The gateway is essential to Canada, and we know that it is very important. As the member mentioned, it is the busiest border crossing. It is absolutely essential to not only our trade but to our continued economic success and security. [SNORE....Are you as tired as I about these platitudes!]
  
  The government is working right now with bilateral and binational partners, such as the United States federal government, the state of Michigan and the province of Ontario where it is situated, to develop a solution that ensures sufficient capacity across the Detroit River to facilitate cross-border trade and traffic, and in fact to enhance it.
  
  As part of this work, we are conducting a comprehensive and harmonized environmental assessment, and I am sure the member would encourage that environmental assessment, to identify the locations of the bridge crossing, the inspection plazas and the access roads.
  
  As well, we are also assessing possible models for delivery of the new crossing because we want to do what is in the best interest of Canadian taxpayers, who are ultimately our boss. Private sector participation, such as the public-private partnership, is one of the models that is being considered.
  
  In November the Minister of Transport, Infrastructure and Communities stated at the public-private partnership conference in Toronto that the government was exploring the opportunities for using a private-public partnership for financing, building, operating and maintaining the new crossing between Windsor and Detroit. This is just one of several options, and I want to be clear with the member. We on this side of the House act in the best interest of Canadian taxpayers. No decision has been made as of it. This can deliver new infrastructure more efficiently and more expeditiously.
  
  Although the government can borrow at a lower rate than the private sector, which is one of the considerations the member has brought forward, financing is only one of the many possible considerations that we have to look at before making this decision.
  
  The cost of private sector borrowing would be offset by the risk that the private sector would take and by increased innovation and efficiency. I suggest the member would have to agree with what the private sector can bring to occasional projects from time to time.
  
  We still have appropriate and effective public oversight by the federal government. More specific, Bill C-3, which was one of the initial pieces of legislation the Conservative government put forward, received royal asset on February 1. No matter what model the government picks, it will be the model for governance over our international bridges and tunnels for the best interest of Canadians. The Conservative government will also ensure that the operator puts in place mechanisms to address community concerns.
  
  Let me assure members that the government is absolutely committed to selecting the delivery option that provides the greatest value for taxpayers while maintaining appropriate public oversight of the new crossing. It is quite frankly a balance for the best interest of Canadians.
  
  The government will continue to work with the binational partnership, all of our partners and listen to stakeholders to explore models for delivering the new crossing that is in the best interest of Canadians. If such a model cannot meet the objectives of the Government of Canada or its United States partner, alternative delivery mechanisms will be pursued.
  
  The Windsor-Detroit gateway is a matter of national priority and the government remains committed to ensuring that a new crossing will be in place by 2013, but we will do so in the best interest of Canadian taxpayers, the residents and all stakeholders.
  
  Mr. Brian Masse:
  Mr. Speaker, given the importance of this infrastructure and the future of our country, it is a slam dunk in terms of moving toward public accountability and ownership.
  
  I have done parliamentary research in the past. What has been concluded when examining public versus private ownership is that under public ownership we have direct control over access, safety, quality and pricing. It is very important for national security issues. [Oh Brian, Bill C-3 has passed. That fight is over already. And you know what the Bridge Co. said about that anyway]
  
  Second to that, I point out that I am concerned about the way the government is operating and moving toward an American style privatization of highway systems, which means increased tolls. What ends up happening is we get investment bankers. For example, Australian and Spanish builders in the United States have taken advantage of the public assets and have make huge profits at the expense of ordinary citizens. However, now there is a backlash because they have gone too far down that road. [Careful Brian, that was what Eddie may have wanted to do with the Tunnel. Are you going to attack him now?]
  
  What I want to hear from the government is whether it will support the call for public ownership.
  
  Now the province of Ontario has joined the cause. In the parliamentary secretary's response to me he mentioned the provincial government. Last Friday in the Windsor Star, David Caplan, the province's public infrastructure minister, said:
  The Ontario government is urging Ottawa to steer clear of private ownership of the next Windsor-Detroit border crossing... [Ontario Cabinet Ministers can say what they want since they have no authority. Like the NDP]
  
  Once again, I stress the importance of public ownership. Get on with the next crossing and avoid lawsuits. It will happen if we have public-private partnerships. [Huh, how is a lawsuit going to be avoided if you take away the Bridge Co.'s business]
  
  Mr. Brian Jean:
  Mr. Speaker, I thank the member for his interest and his research. I would suggest that instead of holding it close to his chest, as so many other members from other parties in the House do, he should provide that information to me. I would be more than happy to look at it, review it and provide it to the minister if it be appropriate. We are a government that is listening to stakeholders and listening to all parties because that is what Canadians want us to do, to work together. I would suggest that the member and all members do that. [How can Brian do that. What else does the Report say?]
  
  I just hope it is not similar to the situation with respect to Bill C-6 which is in the transport committee, and Bill C-11. Bill C-11 was on the projected order for today but I understand the NDP put forward some speakers to try to hold up legislation again. I am hoping that we can count on the member to provide us with the cooperation that is necessary to move legislation through the House and to move in a way that acts in the best interest of Canadians.
  
  I assure the member that is what this government will do. We will act in the best interest of Canadians overall, but we have a balance to strike and we will strike that balance for the Canadian public.