Self-Watering Planters And Running Bridges

What do the Campeau family and the owners of the Ambassador Bridge have in common?

What a ridiculous question you might think. What could the owner of Martha's Greenhouse who waters plants for Business Associations in the City have in common with people who own trucks and run the most successful border crossing in North America? A lot more than you might think!

Let me quote from the Council minutes of May 26, 2008:

• "Martha and Norm Campeau, representing Martha's Greenhouse, appear before Council to provide a brief overview of the services provided by Martha's Greenhouse, and conclude by stating that if the city now wants to offer no cost flower baskets to the business associations, Martha's Greenhouse will suffer a tremendous loss of revenue, at the expense of another small business in the community."

In other words, as several of the Councillors noted, here was the Government, this time the City, being in a position where it could possibly use taxpayer money to put a private enterprise operation out of business.

Of course, our Mayor explained to the Campeaus that they should not be concerned because after all the City was in fact going to double the size of the potential business. Of course, he did not mention that this could attract even more competitors since this invites larger firms if there was a public tender or the City itself to take their business since there was now a larger pot to water.

Is this not very similar with the position of the Ambassador Bridge Owner. He is running good operation, the best in North America, that has helped Canada so well in its export business with the United States and yet the Canadian Government seems to want to put him out of business.

Of course, to ease the pain they produce suspect numbers that says that border traffic will double between now and 30 years from now notwithstanding that truck traffic is the same as 1999 and car volumes have dropped drastically. With that kind of volume, P3 investors from around the world would flock to take over their bridge business.

Do you see what I mean? They are very similar. It does not matter how big you are or how small you are if government wants to take some actions that may impact the business that you have built up for your entire life.

Let me talk more about the Windsor Star story that pointed out that the new DRIC bridge would cannibalize the traffic from the other border crossings--the Blue Water Bridge, the Detroit/Windsor Tunnel and the Ambassador Bridge. There were some absurd statements in that story. Let me "fisk" some of them:

1) "Transport Canada says it doesn't believe the other area border crossings will suffer long-term losses.

"We don't see them closing up," said Mark Butler, a spokesman for Transport Canada and DRIC."

[Of course they are not going to close up since that would devastate the economies of Ontario and Michigan! But they would operate at a loss if another crossing fought for traffic that was not growing as projected by DRIC but was stagnant or decreasing overall.

What Mr. Butler did not say makes my pocketbook ache: Taxpayers are not only going to get stuck for paying for the billions of dollars of cost of the DRIC project, we are going to subsidize the losses of the other crossings and may have to pay damages in a lawsuit! The Sarnia Bridge cannot close down because that would kill the automobile industry that the Governments have been so eager to attract to Ontario. Eddie would go ballistic and so would the City of Detroit if the Tunnel went out of business. Like it or not, the Ambassador Bridge will sue "If government expropriates anybody's business."

Just remember what Sam wrote in his first report. It is a Socialist dream come true:

• "It sets aside the profit-motive, which means each facility is competing for the most traffic, with a utilitarian-motive: the greatest good for the greatest number. Such a scheme may require revenue sharing among participants."]

2)"The Ambassador Bridge will still be competitive and provide service to trucks that are local traffic in the Detroit and Wayne County area. We believe the new crossing will attract trucks going a long distance. Trucks coming from Toronto or Quebec and going to Texas or Florida."

[That was part of the DRIC argument that the volumes would increase so dramatically and double that the Ambassador Bridge would still be full even with 50% of the volume of traffic in the future. It might have been true with the vibrant Big Three automobile industry but since that has been destroyed one wonders what local traffic Mr. Butler is talking about.

Moreover, it appears that Mr. Butler may not have heard Dave Wake's comment that the DRIC Road will merely have an exit at E C Row and Huron Church so that trucks can choose that road with all of its stoplights or continue on with the unimpeded DRIC Road to the border. Of course, when the City of Windsor removes one lane of traffic for bicycles only, as shown in the Schwartz drawing and hinted at by Ministers Cansfield and Cannon, I wonder how many trucks will use that road at all]

3) "Butler said the issue of compensating a border crossing for lost business hasn't come up."

[Of course not. If I am correct, the Governments want to beat down the Bridge Company to lower the price. They haven't got the nerve to pay fair value because if they did I would not have to be writing BLOGs on the border anymore. The Governments expected that the Bridge Company would have sold out by now. Unfortunately, the Bridge Company spread in the Globe and Mail changed that incorrect view of the world.]

4) "Tunnel and Blue Water officials aren't worried about losing business. Both companies believe they have niche markets."

[Their niches are getting smaller. Perhaps it is time that they started worrying. Even with two bridges, expressways right to the border and no major construction that closes down an Interstate highway, the Blue Water Bridge has not taken away a big chunk of the truck traffic from the Ambassador Bridge. As for the Tunnel, it has dropped from second to third busiest crossing for cars.]

5) Neal Belitsky, president of the Windsor-Detroit Tunnel LLC.

"People will take the crossing that provides the quickest and easiest travel for them."

[With seven new booths for cars at the Ambassador Bridge and room for more expansion, I would assume with the Ambassador Gateway project, we can guess which crossing will provide the quickest and easiest travel. Hint: It is NOT the Tunnel.]

6) "A lot of the Blue Water traffic is headed to the suburbs of northern Detroit, said Stan Korosec, vice-president of operations for Blue Water."

[See #4 above]

7) "We will be in business as long as we are needed," said [Gregg]Ward, whose ferry service takes about 10 trips a day carrying hazardous materials and oversized cargo.

"I think I know our place in the grander picture of international transportation. We are a niche service. In times of severe congestion, we keep plants open."

[Unfortunately Gregg, you are no longer needed. If the Sarnia Bridge can handle hazardous materials, so will the new DRIC bridge.

"The proposed bridge would take hazardous material, Butler confirmed."

After all, the P3 investor needs all the truck traffic, including Toronto garbage trucks, it can get. I guess that Mr. Ward has not read that the new DRIC bridge is supposed to end the congestion so there will no longer be a need for his services. In any event, unless he can structure a deal pretty soon with respect to that piece of land over which trucks can no longer cross without permission of the owner, he will be out of business anyway.

8) "Ward said he hasn't heard any discussion about compensating businesses for lost traffic, but he said a compensation claimant will have a hard time proving its case...

"It's a false argument," Ward said of compensation for a border crossing that loses business because of the new crossing."

[See #7 above. Mr. Ward's lawyer will have a heart attack if he ever sees this comment if the new bridge puts the ferry service out of business. At least, taxpayers will not have to pay for his business when it closes down thanks to Mr. Ward's comments!]

I cannot figure out why Governments are spending $5M to improve an operation that seems dead in a few years. More waste of taxpayer money]

9) ""It will be a competitor, but it won't be a subsidized bridge. They will have to pay for the privilege to operate it."

[Yet Mr. Ward also stated before this comment that

• "Ward said the new bridge, which will likely be operated by private enterprise, will face stricter competitive barriers because it will have to pay the government a fee, and government would have some say about tolls and maintenance. The Ambassador Bridge doesn't have any of those issues, Ward said."

Considering also that their financing costs will be substantially higher such that the Ambassador Bridge tolls will be lower, perhaps Mr. Ward can explain how they can stay in business.

Without a subsidy, they are broke unless Governments force traffic to that new bridge regardless.]