The mayor issued a referendum question draft on December 11th, 2014, and one will find an account of it on the Stephen Rees’s blog. On December 18th 2014, the Province issued its “tweaked version“, to be mailed on March 16th 2015.
left: Ballot proposed by the Mayors council – right: version “amended” by the Province
It appears that skeptic people on the outcome of the said referendum could be right: The Province reworded the referendum:
- Out is the PST, in is a new whole tax which could be as different to the PST as the PST is to the GST. The exact wording is
A new Metro Vancouver Congestion Improvement Tax would be applied
as a 0.5% sales tax on the majority of goods and services that are subject to the Provincial Sales Tax and are sold or delivered in the region
It is not hard to fathom that the car dealer will escape to the “Congestion Improvement Tax”, the gas station probably too…
Anyway, it looks to open a whole new can of worm generating ever more red tape (and damaging the main argument in favor of the sale tax: equal on a broad tax base)…That is not good!
The name of the tax: “Metro Vancouver Congestion Improvement Tax”
Do transit investments “improve” congestion?
That is a meme repeated ad nausea: I am not sure people sitting in their cars on Oak bridge share this view.
Let’s dispel the myth: Transit investments never “improved” congestion, and will not magically start to do it tomorrow. they improve mobility choice, and people movement (allowing the economy to continue to growth): that is already a lot, but cars and trucks will still sit in traffic as they do right now.
The tax is certainly misnamed: the only known way to reduce congestion is road pricing.
LRT vs Skytrain?
With the referendum, we could have thought the very nasty debate on technology choice as behind us: Not at all! The Province clearly re opened it:
I had previously noticed many cautious words from the Province such as “The Province will contribute on transit project on a case by case basis, provided a strong business case exists”. When comes transit in Surrey, a recent joint study MOTI/Translink reads:
The BRT and RRT [skytrain]-based alternatives were most cost-effective overall in achieving the project objectives due to greater relative benefits (RRT) or lower costs (BRT). LRT 1 and LRT 4 [chosen by the mayors] performed the worst in this account, due to higher costs and minimal benefits, respectively”
Today the Province changed not only the tax but the wording of the suggested investments:
- Out is the Surrey LRT. In is an unspecified “Rapid Transit” link,
- For good measure, same apply to Vancouver (but here there is a strong business case for a subway)
- …Number of B lines becomes unspecified too..
Suddenly, lot of clarity, on what we gonna pay and what we gonna get for the money, has disappeared…that doesn’t bode well either.
Referendum vs Plebiscite?
Curiously enough, the referendum is replaced by a plebiscite: the words could be interchangeable..or not. An apparently accepted definition (pretty much as worded by Prime Minister Mc Kenzie in 1942) is:
“The plebiscite is an expression of opinion by the people on a general course of action proposed by the government. The vote is not legally binding on the government, although there may be a political and a moral obligation to respect the result.”
It doesn’t matter the viewpoint, you see only vagueness on every aspect of the renamed “Transit plebiscite”: That is not necessarily the good recipe to get the “Yes” vote “out”.
On another hand, the Mayors council doesn’t need a referendum/plebiscite to increase the Translink property tax, so it is not like if it was no “plan B” to finance Transit in the region.
(*) I had in fact first posted them as a comment on the Price tag
and Frances Bula’s blog