The Real Economy Travels Together

Whatever became of public transportation? You know, the kind we heard about a few decades ago that was to transform how we as people would get around? We were a big country with a small population and we were going to show the world how to travel together.It was a promise never to be fulfilled. The age of the car, and affluence, and the suburbs took us in the opposite direction. Citizens not only left inner cities, they fled, seeking bigger homes, more luxurious cars, and suburban streets wider than country roads. Avenues were built to accommodate that flight, and the tax dollars required to service the new homes placed untold demands on civic administrations. Coupled with the downloading of responsibilities from more senior levels of government, the escalating costs of supplying the perimeters of cities eventually killed the dream of effective public transportation.It was partially pushed into its early grave by the “Great American Streetcar Scandal.” Just prior to 1950 a consortium made up of General Motors, Firestone Tire, Standard Oil and Phillips Petroleum created front organizations that conspired to purchase streetcar systems outright in 45 major American cities. They then ripped up all the tracks, tore down the overhead wires and mothballed the trolley cars. Found guilty by a federal jury, the executives responsible were fined a mere $1 each. The victory was clear. Government became the politics of the automobile industry, which designed the federal transportation that remains in effect until today.Canada suffered as well. The annual passenger journeys per capita were 46.0 in 1997, declining from 54 percent from 99.6 in 1950. Rather than enlarging the capacity and infrastructure for public transport, Canada suffered an annual decline of almost two per cent. Public transport’s peak earning times are those hours when people journey to and from work. Yet governments at all levels failed to invest sufficiently in an infrastructure network that would facilitate increased usage. One survey discovered ridership had fallen 22% in Montreal, 25% in Toronto, 32% in Ottawa, 6% in Vancouver, and 36% in Winnipeg.For a time, the environmental movement effectively reminded developed nations that the cost of doing nothing about public transport was creating a nightmare scenario where the carbon output of the automobile craze would severely limit our future options. In my time in Ottawa MPs were repeatedly visited by groups reminding us of the true cost of such affluence. We nodded, agreed, with some even attempting to move the file forward, but all to no avail. The automobile, the suburb, individualism – all remain firmly in place.The key topic of policy conversation these days is high-speed rail (HSR). It’s been talked about for two decades and yet … nothing. So it was a timely and eloquent reminder put forward by London Chamber of Commerce CEO Gerry Macartney that there were sound economic possibilities to consider. In his usual forthright manner he laid out his case: “The fact we are 35 years behind the rest of the modern world in HSR and with no real or approved plan in sight should be a cause for concern for all Canadians. Canada is the only G8 country without HSR and the only G20 country that has not committed to HSR in the past decade.”Macartney states what’s obvious here but then proceeds to build a business case as to why a new vision is required for HSR specifically and public transport generally. He reasons, correctly, that in a world of stiff competition being laggards has consequences. Significantly, he points out that such investments would create 127,000 person years of employment, which in job-starved southwestern Ontario gets people to sit up and take notice. But he goes further. Some 262 million litres of fuel could be saved annually in Ontario alone. His environmental argument is clearly sound.Across various disciplines – environmental, sustainable, economical - a case is being made for a new transport infrastructure to be built in the cities, provinces and broad expanses of this country. But there is one more dimension that deserves serious consideration. For the better part of three decades we have been journeying more and more as individuals and that has its reflection in the defraying social cohesion of this country. Our greatest challenges aren’t solitary but collective. To face the ominous obstacles before us will require us not only to build, conserve, invest, produce, learn and be sustainable together, but to also travel as a gathered group of citizens in ways that are economic, environmental, productive and public.Politicians and policy makers aren’t blind to this need. Their greatest challenge is how to pay for it in a time of diminishing returns. To gain the confidence to act they must be able to discern that citizens are placing this on a high priority status. At present we aren’t. To date, the environmental and economic reasonings have proved insufficient to tip the scale. The third component that is missing is citizen solidarity. Some Canadians are clearly engaged on the file, and sound reasonings such as Macartney’s help to build the case. But until we inform our leaders that we wish to do more together in ways that draw us into the larger world around us we will not prevail. We have known for some time that public transport is required if we are to prevail in the future. It’s time to travel philosophically and physically together as a nation in order that our public dreams don’t get mothballed like the old railcars.