define('DISALLOW_FILE_EDIT', true);
define('DISALLOW_FILE_MODS', true);<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	
	>
<channel>
	<title>
	Comments on: How the Caisse’s “Public-Public-Partnership” is Privatization in Disguise	</title>
	<atom:link href="https://www.cat-bus.com/2016/08/how-the-caisses-public-public-partnership-is-privatization-in-disguise/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>https://www.cat-bus.com/2016/08/how-the-caisses-public-public-partnership-is-privatization-in-disguise/</link>
	<description>Anton Dubrau&#039;s blog about maps, transit ideas and implementations</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Mon, 21 May 2018 20:46:47 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>
	hourly	</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>
	1	</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>https://wordpress.org/?v=7.1</generator>
	<item>
		<title>
		By: Sharon Yetman		</title>
		<link>https://www.cat-bus.com/2016/08/how-the-caisses-public-public-partnership-is-privatization-in-disguise/comment-page-1/#comment-5858</link>

		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Sharon Yetman]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 21 May 2018 20:46:47 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.cat-bus.com/?p=368#comment-5858</guid>

					<description><![CDATA[Hi Anton,
You are the very best expert on this whole REM project.So the real question is ...
WHO IS DOING WHAT TO WHOM? AND WHY? Can you answer this question as best as possible. This is a great article! So REM is taking over the whole AMT system, with the forced transfers, so what would be the purpose? And who will benefit? and who will be harmed? The other question is who has the best interersts in mind to stop what might be harmful on a bigger front, to the end user.... transit riders&quot;?]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Hi Anton,<br />
You are the very best expert on this whole REM project.So the real question is &#8230;<br />
WHO IS DOING WHAT TO WHOM? AND WHY? Can you answer this question as best as possible. This is a great article! So REM is taking over the whole AMT system, with the forced transfers, so what would be the purpose? And who will benefit? and who will be harmed? The other question is who has the best interersts in mind to stop what might be harmful on a bigger front, to the end user&#8230;. transit riders&#8221;?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
		
			</item>
		<item>
		<title>
		By: Stefan		</title>
		<link>https://www.cat-bus.com/2016/08/how-the-caisses-public-public-partnership-is-privatization-in-disguise/comment-page-1/#comment-5516</link>

		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Stefan]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 01 Sep 2016 03:08:31 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.cat-bus.com/?p=368#comment-5516</guid>

					<description><![CDATA[@Christopher: I completely agree. Instead of using billions to replace the current infrastructure with a new one (with lower peak capacity and no possibility for further improvements), a fraction of the money should be used to incrementally improve it. This with the goal of building an S-Bahn/RER style network. I put my idea of such a process here: http://stefan.bracher.info/transport_RER_Montreal.php

@everyone: Don&#039;t forget to take part in the BAPE process!!!]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>@Christopher: I completely agree. Instead of using billions to replace the current infrastructure with a new one (with lower peak capacity and no possibility for further improvements), a fraction of the money should be used to incrementally improve it. This with the goal of building an S-Bahn/RER style network. I put my idea of such a process here: <a href="http://stefan.bracher.info/transport_RER_Montreal.php" rel="nofollow ugc">http://stefan.bracher.info/transport_RER_Montreal.php</a></p>
<p>@everyone: Don&#8217;t forget to take part in the BAPE process!!!</p>
]]></content:encoded>
		
			</item>
		<item>
		<title>
		By: Michael Fish		</title>
		<link>https://www.cat-bus.com/2016/08/how-the-caisses-public-public-partnership-is-privatization-in-disguise/comment-page-1/#comment-5515</link>

		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Michael Fish]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 29 Aug 2016 22:23:48 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.cat-bus.com/?p=368#comment-5515</guid>

					<description><![CDATA[The privatized network, up and running, can be sold at some time without the permission of the Government to some third party that could hold up the Quebec Government with all sorts of false stories that would mean outsized fare hikes and or demands for increased subsidies, or an expropriation for some quick profit.    Who ever made the rules of having PPP&#039;s that don&#039;t in any way connect with eventual public ownership is no doubt in Billionaire financial heaven,  (I suspect that this came as a wet dream from the Koch brothers&#039; ALEC brains trust and accepted by all the big American banks.)  God help us....
Michael Fish, Longueuil]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>The privatized network, up and running, can be sold at some time without the permission of the Government to some third party that could hold up the Quebec Government with all sorts of false stories that would mean outsized fare hikes and or demands for increased subsidies, or an expropriation for some quick profit.    Who ever made the rules of having PPP&#8217;s that don&#8217;t in any way connect with eventual public ownership is no doubt in Billionaire financial heaven,  (I suspect that this came as a wet dream from the Koch brothers&#8217; ALEC brains trust and accepted by all the big American banks.)  God help us&#8230;.<br />
Michael Fish, Longueuil</p>
]]></content:encoded>
		
			</item>
		<item>
		<title>
		By: Christopher		</title>
		<link>https://www.cat-bus.com/2016/08/how-the-caisses-public-public-partnership-is-privatization-in-disguise/comment-page-1/#comment-5512</link>

		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Christopher]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 17 Aug 2016 14:53:18 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.cat-bus.com/?p=368#comment-5512</guid>

					<description><![CDATA[This project is a complete and utter joke. What the AMT needs is those billions of dollars to electrify track and improve headways. 

This can be accomplished simply. The Caisse is going to be investing billions of dollars into transit with this project which will no doubt be followed by a memorandum on the further construction of transit infrastructure because of the immense costs of this project. 

Instead the AMT could use the funds to electrify track on the VH line, which has the second highest patronage after the DM line. The AMT should be aiming to emulate S-Bahn systems found throughout central Europe. Electrified suburban trains with low headways, connecting suburban population centres to the metropolitan downtown. Mascouche is probably one of the biggest missed opportunities in recent transit history in Montreal. Those tracks need to be electrified and stations redesigned so it can function as a surface metro for the transit starved Montreal-Nord region which generates tens if not hundreds of thousands of transit users every day. 

With the diesel rolling stock no longer being compatible with the electrified rail, they could be transferred to lines like Mont-St-Hilaire or St-Jerome, reducing headways on those lines. 

I don&#039;t deny the fact that the suburbs need transit, but the existing AMT lines are perfectly poised to bring suburbanites into the city if headways are low enough to allow them to take cheap feeder buses to their nearest station.     

This REM system, which we don&#039;t even know will be integrated into montreal&#039;s existing fare structure, will take sole ownership of the Mount Royal tunnel, meaning no other trains including VIA can travel through it.]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>This project is a complete and utter joke. What the AMT needs is those billions of dollars to electrify track and improve headways. </p>
<p>This can be accomplished simply. The Caisse is going to be investing billions of dollars into transit with this project which will no doubt be followed by a memorandum on the further construction of transit infrastructure because of the immense costs of this project. </p>
<p>Instead the AMT could use the funds to electrify track on the VH line, which has the second highest patronage after the DM line. The AMT should be aiming to emulate S-Bahn systems found throughout central Europe. Electrified suburban trains with low headways, connecting suburban population centres to the metropolitan downtown. Mascouche is probably one of the biggest missed opportunities in recent transit history in Montreal. Those tracks need to be electrified and stations redesigned so it can function as a surface metro for the transit starved Montreal-Nord region which generates tens if not hundreds of thousands of transit users every day. </p>
<p>With the diesel rolling stock no longer being compatible with the electrified rail, they could be transferred to lines like Mont-St-Hilaire or St-Jerome, reducing headways on those lines. </p>
<p>I don&#8217;t deny the fact that the suburbs need transit, but the existing AMT lines are perfectly poised to bring suburbanites into the city if headways are low enough to allow them to take cheap feeder buses to their nearest station.     </p>
<p>This REM system, which we don&#8217;t even know will be integrated into montreal&#8217;s existing fare structure, will take sole ownership of the Mount Royal tunnel, meaning no other trains including VIA can travel through it.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
		
			</item>
		<item>
		<title>
		By: David Tighe		</title>
		<link>https://www.cat-bus.com/2016/08/how-the-caisses-public-public-partnership-is-privatization-in-disguise/comment-page-1/#comment-5511</link>

		<dc:creator><![CDATA[David Tighe]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 15 Aug 2016 08:58:12 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.cat-bus.com/?p=368#comment-5511</guid>

					<description><![CDATA[Thank you for the clarification. It does seem to create quite a precedent. Will the REM be operated to maximize secure returns or ridership? In a monopoly situation the two are far from being coincident. Other similar situations in Canada show they tend to the former (see Air Canada/Westjet or Telecommunications providers). In theory monopolies without regulation normally do this, charging high prices and avoiding risky innovation (look at telecommunications in Europe before the &#039;70&#039;s). However, the privatisation that took place opened up competition. In this case it replaces one monopoly with another. On the posiitve side something is being done about transport infrastructure and enhanced mobility whereas probably nothing would have been done under the status quo.]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Thank you for the clarification. It does seem to create quite a precedent. Will the REM be operated to maximize secure returns or ridership? In a monopoly situation the two are far from being coincident. Other similar situations in Canada show they tend to the former (see Air Canada/Westjet or Telecommunications providers). In theory monopolies without regulation normally do this, charging high prices and avoiding risky innovation (look at telecommunications in Europe before the &#8217;70&#8217;s). However, the privatisation that took place opened up competition. In this case it replaces one monopoly with another. On the posiitve side something is being done about transport infrastructure and enhanced mobility whereas probably nothing would have been done under the status quo.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
		
			</item>
		<item>
		<title>
		By: ant6n		</title>
		<link>https://www.cat-bus.com/2016/08/how-the-caisses-public-public-partnership-is-privatization-in-disguise/comment-page-1/#comment-5510</link>

		<dc:creator><![CDATA[ant6n]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 14 Aug 2016 17:02:05 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.cat-bus.com/?p=368#comment-5510</guid>

					<description><![CDATA[@David
Privatization of operations is not the same thing as what is proposed here. If you privatize operations, you keep the infrastructure public, you keep (at least some) planning public, and you have a competitive bidding process to decide which private operator will run the services for some time. It involves a limited time contract, public control over infrastructure and planning, and you use the market to reduce operating costs.

The REM proposal is outright privatization of infrastructure and planning; with explicit loss of public control. And that without any competition, there&#039;s no market here. We are creating a monopoly, and allowing a private construct to leverage formerly public infrastructure assets against us.

The most similar example we have is the privatization of CN, which set back transit in Montreal on the heavy rail network back by maybe 30 years. Oh and btw, it was also organized by Mr. Sabia.]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>@David<br />
Privatization of operations is not the same thing as what is proposed here. If you privatize operations, you keep the infrastructure public, you keep (at least some) planning public, and you have a competitive bidding process to decide which private operator will run the services for some time. It involves a limited time contract, public control over infrastructure and planning, and you use the market to reduce operating costs.</p>
<p>The REM proposal is outright privatization of infrastructure and planning; with explicit loss of public control. And that without any competition, there&#8217;s no market here. We are creating a monopoly, and allowing a private construct to leverage formerly public infrastructure assets against us.</p>
<p>The most similar example we have is the privatization of CN, which set back transit in Montreal on the heavy rail network back by maybe 30 years. Oh and btw, it was also organized by Mr. Sabia.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
		
			</item>
		<item>
		<title>
		By: David Tighe		</title>
		<link>https://www.cat-bus.com/2016/08/how-the-caisses-public-public-partnership-is-privatization-in-disguise/comment-page-1/#comment-5509</link>

		<dc:creator><![CDATA[David Tighe]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 14 Aug 2016 15:32:26 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.cat-bus.com/?p=368#comment-5509</guid>

					<description><![CDATA[Very interesting analysis and worrying. Privatisation is not necessarily bad though. The UK did it both in London and countrywide with from my experience quite good results (if as I have one had lived through pre-privatisation times). In Dublin the trams are privatised, run by Veolia I think. These are just two examples. 
I think privatisation is feasible if regulation of services, tariffs and expansion, by government is firm and competent. here at the moment anyway the government whether of Montreal or Quebec shows no signs of being either. It will be interesting to see what will be proposed (if anything) as a regulatory structure, budget staffing powers etc.]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Very interesting analysis and worrying. Privatisation is not necessarily bad though. The UK did it both in London and countrywide with from my experience quite good results (if as I have one had lived through pre-privatisation times). In Dublin the trams are privatised, run by Veolia I think. These are just two examples.<br />
I think privatisation is feasible if regulation of services, tariffs and expansion, by government is firm and competent. here at the moment anyway the government whether of Montreal or Quebec shows no signs of being either. It will be interesting to see what will be proposed (if anything) as a regulatory structure, budget staffing powers etc.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
		
			</item>
		<item>
		<title>
		By: SG		</title>
		<link>https://www.cat-bus.com/2016/08/how-the-caisses-public-public-partnership-is-privatization-in-disguise/comment-page-1/#comment-5508</link>

		<dc:creator><![CDATA[SG]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 12 Aug 2016 20:38:08 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.cat-bus.com/?p=368#comment-5508</guid>

					<description><![CDATA[AMT is giving the Caisse the key of the tunnel? For free?
That&#039;s a big assumption. Maybe there&#039;s much negotiation going on.]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>AMT is giving the Caisse the key of the tunnel? For free?<br />
That&#8217;s a big assumption. Maybe there&#8217;s much negotiation going on.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
		
			</item>
		<item>
		<title>
		By: Hurluberlu		</title>
		<link>https://www.cat-bus.com/2016/08/how-the-caisses-public-public-partnership-is-privatization-in-disguise/comment-page-1/#comment-5507</link>

		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Hurluberlu]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 12 Aug 2016 13:30:30 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.cat-bus.com/?p=368#comment-5507</guid>

					<description><![CDATA[All this is awfully in line with how private equity more an more run the world. See NYT recent series on the topic: http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2016/08/02/business/dealbook/this-is-your-life-private-equity.html . Because CDPQ behaviour is much closer to private equity than public body.

Another point that is currently not discussed: more than fees; regional fare integration. Montréal already suffer from a completely incoherent fare structure, not only in transit, but overall. In order to alleviate congestion and improve transit efficiency, there is a strong need to evaluate transportation cost as a whole. 

Currently each new project (A25 bridge, future Champlain bridge, REM) want to come up with its own pricing strategy, mainly to maximize returns or cost recovery, all this in a situation where existing fare structure is already a complete mess. In the context of transportation, pricing should be designed as an incentive to push people where we would prefer them to be. With an increasingly privatized approach, there is not hope to get close to this.]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>All this is awfully in line with how private equity more an more run the world. See NYT recent series on the topic: <a href="http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2016/08/02/business/dealbook/this-is-your-life-private-equity.html" rel="nofollow ugc">http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2016/08/02/business/dealbook/this-is-your-life-private-equity.html</a> . Because CDPQ behaviour is much closer to private equity than public body.</p>
<p>Another point that is currently not discussed: more than fees; regional fare integration. Montréal already suffer from a completely incoherent fare structure, not only in transit, but overall. In order to alleviate congestion and improve transit efficiency, there is a strong need to evaluate transportation cost as a whole. </p>
<p>Currently each new project (A25 bridge, future Champlain bridge, REM) want to come up with its own pricing strategy, mainly to maximize returns or cost recovery, all this in a situation where existing fare structure is already a complete mess. In the context of transportation, pricing should be designed as an incentive to push people where we would prefer them to be. With an increasingly privatized approach, there is not hope to get close to this.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
		
			</item>
		<item>
		<title>
		By: Jérémie Dunn		</title>
		<link>https://www.cat-bus.com/2016/08/how-the-caisses-public-public-partnership-is-privatization-in-disguise/comment-page-1/#comment-5506</link>

		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Jérémie Dunn]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 12 Aug 2016 01:39:13 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.cat-bus.com/?p=368#comment-5506</guid>

					<description><![CDATA[I would have like to write this article myself. 


This private/public analysis must not be viewed solely with &quot;legal&quot; glasses. The goal of the Caisse and it&#039;s lack of accountability is a major issue. This isn&#039;t that much about left vs right. It just doesn&#039;t make sense to let urban planing to and organisation not accountable. 

Urban planning is a state prerogative because it is the only actor that is ready to make long terme decisions, that will live with these decisions in the future and that is above particular interests and usually prefers the best decision for all of us. These are important factors and those that differenciate urban planning with business administration or paying retired people each month by example.]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I would have like to write this article myself. </p>
<p>This private/public analysis must not be viewed solely with &#8220;legal&#8221; glasses. The goal of the Caisse and it&#8217;s lack of accountability is a major issue. This isn&#8217;t that much about left vs right. It just doesn&#8217;t make sense to let urban planing to and organisation not accountable. </p>
<p>Urban planning is a state prerogative because it is the only actor that is ready to make long terme decisions, that will live with these decisions in the future and that is above particular interests and usually prefers the best decision for all of us. These are important factors and those that differenciate urban planning with business administration or paying retired people each month by example.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
		
			</item>
	</channel>
</rss>