Proceedings of the Standing Senate Committee on
Transport and Communications
Issue 23 - Evidence - Afternoon Sitting
HALIFAX, Thursday, February 21, 2002
The Standing Senate Committee on Transport and Communications met this day at 1:37 p.m. to examine issues facing the intercity busing industry.
Senator Lise Bacon (Chairman) in the Chair.
[English]
The Chairman: Our first witness this afternoon is Mr. Brookins.
Mr. George Brookins, Owner, Trius Tours Ltd.: Thank you for inviting me here today. I will pick out the highlights of our brief.
Trius Tours Limited, a Prince Edward Island company, was incorporated in 1986. We began working in Nova Scotia in about 1990-91, and we went on to become a substantial carrier in that province.
Over the years, Trius Tours Limited has taken great pride to provide quality service, professional and personal service to our customer and for that, we have gained great satisfaction and, I think, good recognition in the marketplace. We have two mottos. One is, ``Always be friendly and drive safely.'' The other one ties in with our name, Trius: ``Trius, you'll like us.''
Tourism is an important industry in Nova Scotia and the Atlantic region. With the September 11 disaster of 2001, there has been some return to bus travel. Our enquiries indicate that the bus industry will do better in 2002 than in 2001.
Our fleet consists of 18 modern motorcoaches with capacity for 47-56 passengers; five mini shuttle buses or transit type buses; six 15-passenger vans; three 7-passenger deluxe vans.
Trius' most important focus is the quality of our equipment, which has resulted from the high-class inspection standards in the Province of Nova Scotia. The standard is not as high in P.E.I. We have met the high standards of the Province of Nova Scotia and, as a result, the quality of our equipment has improved and that, in turn, has resulted in better ridership.
I believe that the P.E.I. tour operators are at a disadvantage in the regulatory system. Motorcoach companies we compete with in Nova Scotia have an open market on Prince Edward Island. This means they solicit the P.E.I. customers, which they have the right to do and there is nothing wrong with that. It is fair competition. However, in Nova Scotia, the restrictions that are in place are, in my opinion, not working to the betterment of the industry. The customer has no say in who they would like to be their motorcoach company. We have been a big part of the busing industry in Nova Scotia for the last three or four years, and we are still restricted. I will come to that. However, I do know that we will continue to be a major motorcoach company in this province in the future.
We are very concerned about the business practices of the large companies in Nova Scotia. They do not want other bus companies to operate in the province. I believe that they are succeeding in putting some small operators out of business.
Good competition makes for healthy business. I now have a licence to operate in the Province of Nova Scotia from May through October. This came about after five presentations to the board, $100,000 in legal fees, which is fine and dandy. However, the customers that we will have served so well between May and October will be looking to us to serve them through the other six months, and we cannot. Who loses? The answer is: the customer and Trius. To apply for that licence would probably cost the company an additional $50,000 because of the opposition of the major companies. They just do not want healthy competition.
In a different vein, we believe that the rates for the Confederation Bridge are unfair. In the fall of 2001, we met with the executive vice president and strategy vice president of the Vinci Corporation. The Vinci Corporation is the controlling shareholder, or the owner of the Confederation Bridge and, along with John Francis, the general manager of Strait Crossing Inc., and the deputy ministers of Tourism, Public Works, and Highways for P.E.I., they the rates. Strait Crossing Inc. was prepared to drop the rates from $215.15, to approximately $48 or $50 for motorcoaches. They took the proposal rate to the board of directors and got approval. Then the Federal Department of Public Works in Ottawa rejected it. The reason it came back to me was that it did not warrant any political time. I am the small bus company in P.E.I., so I could see how it was hurting tourism more than other people. I do believe that will change by January 1, 2003, because they will not hold a board meeting until November of 2002.
On the topic of intercity busing, presently we have vehicles coming out of Surrey and Summerside in the morning with people going to work in Charlottetown and then returning in the evening. We operate the city transit in the city of Charlottetown. We have two vehicles that transport mentally and physically challenged adults, Monday through Friday. We are a strong supporter of public transit for P.E.I., for the people who do not have other means of transportation. They should have the right to be able to have public transportation to take them to work, to their doctors' surgeries, to shopping malls, and so on.
The Chairman: What major recommendation would you want this committee to act upon?
Mr. Brookins: If I could be licensed for the additional six months in Nova Scotia, that would be on my wish list.
The Chairman: We do not have much power in Nova Scotia.
Senator Forrestall: What about total deregulation?
Mr. Brookins: No, I would not suggest total deregulation.
Nova Scotia is a hub of the Maritimes, and Halifax is where the action is. Trius would not be in Prince Edward Island with the fleet of buses that we have today if we were not in the Nova Scotia market. I have to be thankful that we are here. Does that answer your question?
The Chairman: You said that you do not want total deregulation.
Mr. Brookins: No, I do not. It takes away the competition.
Senator Oliver: I probably should disclose a conflict of interest because last week I was in Maritime Canada at the Senate Agricultural Committee and we rented a Trius bus for our tours from P.E.I., Nova Scotia, New Brunswick. I wanted to disclose that to the committee.
You say that you are concerned about the business practices of the large bus companies in Nova Scotia. You say that they do not want any other bus companies in Nova Scotia and that they are succeeding in putting the small operator out of business through unfair business ethics. Can you tell me what that means?
Mr. Brookins: ``Ethics,'' may not be the right word, but they want to control the market. You can have a tour company and you can have a busing company, and you can call the tour company by one name and your busing company by another. You can also fool around with pricing and so on. The small operator does not have the flexibility to do that. You can operate at a loss for only so long. If a company only has four or five buses, it cannot upgrade its fleet and stay in business. The small bus operators in Nova Scotia, today, are all for sale.
Senator Callbeck: I would say that $100 000 in legal fees and another $50 000 sounds like an awful lot of money. Have you have talked to other people who have tried to get these routes? Is that an unusual amount of money that you had to pay in legal fees, or is it normal?
Mr. Brookins: You have to be very prepared before you apply for a licence to operate in the province of Nova Scotia. You might forget to use the word ``return,'' and, with eight or nine lawyers sitting around the table, with that word missing, it might cost you $20,000. That money is out the window. You then have to set a new hearing date and the next time you come back it is another $20,000. This has gone on for a number of years. In the early days, when Trius applied for a licence, we thought being an honest company would be enough, that they would take us at face value. The fact is, you have to be prepared.
The cost is not exorbitant. I am not complaining about the price. I am happy I have my licence, but I could go broke.
To go back to the additional six months, I definitely want that. I have lived through this, I have paid my way, and I am prepared to go on. I have not gone broke in the bus business yet.
Senator Callbeck: It is a lot of money.
You talked about the rate to cross Confederation Bridge. You said that your rate application was rejected, but I did not catch what you said after that. Do you think that it will be reversed? You said there is going to be a board of directors meeting?
Mr. Brookins: When I met with the vice presidents of marketing from the Vinci Corporation — and the bridge opened in 1997 — that was the first time I had a chance to sit down and talk with these two gentleman. They are marketing people. They know the tour business is not great. The statistics for crossing the bridge are out there, even though they do not make them public. They could see the situation, and they were prepared to make this change. They asked me to show them some documentation. They said, ``Talk is cheap. Back it up with documentation.'' I cannot do that. They just do not operate that way.
John Francis, the general manager of Strait Crossing told me go just get through 2002. He said that by 2003 they would be working on this. A 60-foot-long potato truck that weighs 40,000 or 50,000 pounds is going across for $47 or $48. The breakdown that they did with me was that they would increase the trucking fare by $1.50 and reduce the bus fare to $48. They would lose revenue of approximately $400,000 in bus rates and they would pick it up on the truck rates and it would balance out. It would not be a major political issue. However, that did not happen in 2002.
Other bus companies such as SMT, who are here today, and DRL have dealt with this. I think that by 2003 we will have it, with your help.
The Chairman: Our next witness is Mr. John Harding from DRL.
Mr. John Harding, Assistant General Manager, DRL: Unfortunately, I do not have a prepared brief to present. However, I have some comments to put on the record.
DRL has been in the transportation business since about 1922, mostly in the fishing industry with schooners and in the trucking industry hauling fish out of Newfoundland fish plants.
In 1996 DRL bought the CN road cruiser, the trans-island passenger service that operates across Newfoundland. It was operated by CN under federal authority. That replaced the passenger train in 1968 and it was a temporary measure. In 1969, it was given authority to operate full time in place of the trans-island passenger service. That continued to operate until 1995 and with the ``Roads for Rail'' deal it was determined by the federal and the provincial government that CN no longer had a responsibility to operate a passenger service across the province. It was changed from a federal responsibility to a provincial responsibility, and it was offered for sale. DRL bought it in 1996.
I worked with CN for over 33 years and I retired when we sold the road cruiser. Two and a half years ago, I came back to work with DRL. In my tenure with CN, I worked in every division including marketing and motive power, every part of it, and I managed the road cruiser from 1990 until the sale.
In the time with the road cruiser, I sat on the federal minister's Advisory Committee on Accessibility, the Pro Truckers Advisory Committee of Newfoundland and the Fuel Conservation Committee with the Province of Newfoundland. Since I joined DRL, I have been filling the position of assistant general manager reporting to the owner, of course, who is the general manager.
We started in 1996, and in late 1998 we assumed the McKenzie operation in Nova Scotia. Since that time, we have expanded in Nova Scotia to a school bus operation and to vacations, which a tourist type of business. We are also heavily into the cruise ship business. At present we operate close to 200 units. About 70 of those are motorcoaches. In addition, we have two licences in Ontario and we have a motorcoach operation, Presidential Coach Lines, out of Miami.
On behalf of DRL, I would like to say, up front, that we are not sure if it is deregulation or destabilization that we are talking here. In our opinion deregulation in the bus industry will lead to mass destabilization on several fronts. From our perspective, there are many reasons why deregulation would be a negative approach in Canada. I guess the least important of all would be the monetary contribution that operators have already made to be in a regulated area. We just heard an operator say that he has spent in excess of $100,000 on that already. When you consider the capital structure and the cost of getting into the business, with deregulation, that money would be lost. If they throw the market wide open with complete deregulation, there would be no way of recouping what we have invested up to now.
We have no problem with regulation. If we can demonstrate that there is a need to add motorcoaches to the business, and the authorities give us permission or authority to operate, that is fine with us. If we cannot demonstrate that there is a need there and we are unable to convince people in positions of authority that there is a need for additional coaches, then perhaps we should not have a licence.
Deregulation would cause certain things to happen. I went through deregulation in Newfoundland when I was with CN road crews and I saw what happened. With deregulation no one would suggest that the operator would take his bus to a small cove where there would be one passenger a week. Those are the places where many of the line hauls now operate. Operators will take their buses to the more lucrative markets that are already served by the companies we talk about here today. The unfortunate part is that, with deregulation, a lot of the scheduling will very quickly be changed. You cannot expect the big operators to operate into the small communities and let the newbees come in and take the cream of the crop or cherry pick, as we call it. If deregulation is where we are headed, it will be critical to places like Nova Scotia and Newfoundland. In the triangle in central Canada it probably will not have a big effect because the population base is there.
In Newfoundland we ask the question: ``What does Mrs. Magilicutty do in Stephenville when the only hospital she can get to is in St. John's; the only place she can see an eye doctor is St. John's; and the only place she can see an orthodontist is St. John's?'' Our schedule of service now runs through Stephenville. If deregulation were to come in in Newfoundland, we would not be going into Stephenville. How does Mrs. Magilicutty, and the other, in Newfoundland, 10,000 Mrs. Magilicuttys, get to St. John's? I am sure the same thing applies in Nova Scotia. Everybody will want to run on the highway from Sydney to Halifax or on any of the main roads where the population is located. With deregulation, I can assure you that the rural parts of all provinces, especially Eastern Canada, will be dramatically affected. The service they now have will no longer be available. It will not be decreased; it will just disappear. Nobody will buy a motorcoach to go in and pick up somebody in an off-centre place for seven days of the week. We now go to lots of places that cost us money, but it is part of the schedule. We accept that. However, when deregulation comes in, we will not be there.
The other side of deregulation is that we depend on summer work to offset our line haul operations in wintertime. If deregulation comes into effect, the companies like Coach U.S.A. and others that have 1,000 or 1,400 coaches will come in. Two weeks ago I was in a yard in Los Angeles, and I counted 96 Renaissance parked, and 160 coaches parked with Coach U.S.A. There was nowhere to put them. Do you think those coaches would not be in here if deregulation came? They will come in here in the summertime and pick off all the lucrative summer trade, the tours, the charters, and all those things. Come October, they will be gone. What will be left here then? Do not think that companies like DRL and the bigger companies will keep coaches running all winter long and run line haul services for the public in these areas when the U.S. multinationals will come in and take all the cream in the summertime. Deregulation will let them in. There will be no way of stopping them. Once they get in, we will be here. We will not be able to afford to be here, and we are not going to want to be here.
We are all in business to serve the people, and we do the best we can, but we are definitely in business to make money as well. If you take away our ability to make money in the summertime to offset our expenses in the wintertime, we will just not be here. I speak solely for DRL. Others have to speak for themselves, of course.
In Newfoundland, with CN road cruiser, we were buying two new coaches every year. We never bought a new coach when they deregulated. Currently we run a line haul operation in Newfoundland. The only new coaches that we put in Newfoundland are for our line haul operation because that is the only place that we have confidence that we are going to be. We are protected. We know that we are going to be there, and we know that nobody else is coming in.
We also have new coaches in Nova Scotia because we are protected in Nova Scotia under the regulation. If we have tours or charters in Newfoundland in the summertime we send coaches out of Nova Scotia. That is what everybody does. For the most part, the coaches in Newfoundland, with the exception of the three that we keep in Newfoundland for line haul operation, are all older coaches. Some are 18 to 20 years old. I am not saying that they are not in good shape. I am not saying that they are not maintained. I am talking about DRL and all the other operators. When deregulation happened in Newfoundland, everybody who could buy a coach bought one. They brought those into Newfoundland. With deregulation, the inspection procedure is not quite as stringent. All you have to do is prove fitness. There is no actual inspection by an inspector unless you are pulled over at a roadside stop.
In our tour business, we had 22 coaches to look after. We did not need so many for the line haul, but we need them over the Christmas period. We used those 22 coaches during mid-term breaks and when the university closed, and on the first of July weekend and other holidays. We made money on the tour and charter side, and that gave us the ability to keep those coaches here.
When we had two coaches here, one down in Stephenville, three somewhere else, four somewhere else, and others all over the island, $25,000 to $30,000 worth of coaches, then these guys were going out and offering tour and charter prices that we could not match. They were driving the coaches themselves. They were maintaining the coaches themselves. We were still operating with uniformed drivers, CN contracts, and all the things that go with being part of an established company. We could not compete with their $450 or $500 days.
Why would you buy new equipment if you are just going to park it and hope that you get a charter if somebody else refuses it? That is what deregulation did in Newfoundland. We no longer bought new coaches. We went into a refurbishing mode, that is, taking older coaches and rebuilding them. We did those things because we did not have the confidence to buy new coaches. Deregulation gave us absolutely no confidence in the marketplace.
We fear that, if Nova Scotia or any other part of Canada is deregulated, it will be unfeasible for us to buy new coaches. If you do not have confidence, why would you buy new coaches at $500,000 or $550,000 each to park them against the wall just in case something comes up? You have to be able to use them, to market them, and you certainly have to be able to pay for them. If you do not pay for them at the end of the month, they are gone. They take them back.
Deregulation will put at risk what we already have. It will make it easier for anybody who owns a coach to be in the business. There may be 500 coaches in Nova Scotia, but they will not be there forever. They may be there the first year, but in the second year there will not be 500. By the third or fourth year, there will be none here because they will not be making money. Line haul as we now know it will be over.
As for scheduled service, who will operate a scheduled service? Nobody will do that when everybody can cherry pick the lucrative runs and leave the rest for us to operate. It is not going to happen.
Look at what happened to the fishery in Newfoundland. I am a Newfoundlander.
Senator Oliver: Is most of your business in Newfoundland now?
Mr. Harding: No, I would say that 75 to 80 per cent of our revenue is generated in Nova Scotia. With deregulation, there is no business in Newfoundland. We are not going to make major capital investments in Newfoundland. What for? We could put a new coach in there and some guy could come in and offer a charter for $450 or $500. You cannot put a new coach on the road for $500 a day. It is impossible. If you take a $10,000 lease on a new coach for a month, it is the same as having a mortgage. Divide that by 30 days. Your coach has to pull in $800 a day for 20 days to break even. The 21st day is the first day you make a dollar. The other guys are offering lower rates because it does not matter to them. A new coach matters only matters to the big tour operators. They demand coaches that are five years or three years old or newer, and they are willing to pay for new coaches. However, it is for summer work that we put the new coaches on the road. Those coaches are off the road in the winter.
If we lose the our summer work to these tour companies because of deregulation and multinationals coming and taking over, we will not have new coaches here in the wintertime either, and neither will anybody else. We won't be able to afford it.
Deregulation to us is a very strong point. We support regulation.
Our quota is related to people. That is what we are out there to catch. The quota in the fishery is related to how many fish are out there. When the last pound of fish was caught, they turned around and gave everybody a licence, so they made sure that the people who were in the fishery made enough to sustain their boats, their nets and their livelihood. Regulation does that for us. Regulation has given us the ability to be competitive. It has given us the ability to stay in business.
I cannot make a stronger case for regulation than to tell you what I saw happen in Newfoundland. I would hate to see that happen in Nova Scotia. I would hate to see that happen anywhere else in Canada. I think Ontario has realized that deregulation was not the way to go and they have started to regulate again. The province of Newfoundland is struggling with deregulation. They do not know how to handle it. They deregulated when people had bought equipment. It is now deregulated, so and how do they get back in?
The only part of Newfoundland that is regulated is the corridor, as they call it, and 15 kilometres on either side of the corridor. However, they cannot enforce it. If a person goes down in one of the small communities and picks up a van load of people, they are not supposed to drive on the corridor but they drive all the way into St. John's with those people.
Once you open the floodgates, there is no way of closing them. Once you deregulate, it is wide open. It is over. I am sure that the summer work will be gone, and I am sure the winter work will be up for grabs. Within three or four years, there will be very little, if any, bus service in Eastern Canada. There is no question that it will be maintained in the golden triangle, because of the population there. Everybody will make a living, but they will not make a living in the smaller centres. They will not make a living in Eastern Canada.
How do we get people back on the motorcoach? At the risk of sounding very critical, I think the federal government should look at itself in the mirror. When I was with CN, I saw subsidies come and go. VIA Rail has $500 million or $600 million for capital purchases. How much money was given to the motorcoach businesses for capital purchases? Nothing. VIA Rail received subsides to improve the roadbed, through CN. I know they operated over CN tracks. Can you imagine the subsidies that went into CN? I can tell you about some that went into Newfoundland. The amounts are astronomical. They were getting indirect subsidies. They received operational subsidies. They can put on specials because if they lose money it will be picked up by the feds. If we put on a special and we lose money, we have to get a loan.
As for the airline industry, I can catch two flights out of St. John's. One leaves at ten o'clock in the morning and the other one leaves at 10:30. One is with Tango. The plane has an Air Canada symbol on the tail of it. The people on the plane wear Air Canada insignia. Instead of getting a cookie, I get a bag of nuts and a pop. That is the only difference. A seat on the one that leaves at ten o'clock costs $189. A seat on the other one costs $830. It leaves at 10:30. How much does it cost? Is it $830 or is it $189? It does not matter. At the end there may be $100 million dollars lost and right now the government is giving it to them.
How much are they giving the motorcoach industry? Nothing. They give us nothing. If you want to get people back on the bus, make it a level playing field. If it costs $1,000 to buy a plane ticket, it costs $1,000. If it costs $80 for a bus ticket, it costs $80. If it costs $200 to get on VIA, it costs $200. You know where your people are going to be. When people are not travelling on business, money does matter to them. They are going to be on the bus. Do you want to know how to get them back on? Make it a level playing field. Subsidize everybody to the same tune.
I sat in on a meeting a little while ago, and a lady told me that she cannot compete with us with her 7-passenger bus. I asked her, ``How much per seat does your bus cost you?'' I told her that I thought that her bus for eight paying passengers cost about $30,000. That is about $4,000 a seat, give or take. I said we get 50 people on a $550,000 coach. How much is that a seat? I told her I put more into every seat on my bus than you do on your little bus. The difference is my bus is parked four months out of the year and your bus runs every day with passengers. If you do not have passengers, you do not run the bus. If it takes you two people to break even and you do not get two, you do not run. We put our bus on in the morning at 7:30 out of St. John's and if nobody gets on it, we still run all the way to Port aux Basques. We are on a schedule. All the bus companies and all the operators are doing the same thing. Deregulation will stop that. I will not have the run. I will only run when I can make money, the same as everyone else.
We have made substantial investments in Nova Scotia. We want to be in Nova Scotia. We have 100 new school buses in Nova Scotia that we just started to run 18 months ago. We made that substantial investment. We have coaches here. We are looking at properties here. We have expanded into stores here. Our base, though, is our motorcoach operation. Deregulation will chase us out of Nova Scotia. There is no question in our minds that deregulation will hurt the people of Nova Scotia and the people of Eastern Canada. It is going to put the people of Nova Scotia in a similar situation to the travellers in Newfoundland.
In 1985 through to 1989, passenger counts in Newfoundland were about 50 per cent. Through the 1990s to now it has been about the same. It is up one year, and down a bit the next. It may be up a little bit this year, but not enough to encourage us to go out and buy a new Cadillac or anything. It fluctuates a little bit.
Through the mid-1980s into the 1990s, there were many reasons for passengers to leave. It was not because we priced ourselves out of the market. Newfoundland changed the school-leaving age. Kids had to go on to Grade 12. Instead of the kids going to university at age 16 and running home to momma every weekend, they now go at age 18. They don't want to go home. They want to go down to George Street.
Then they combined first and second year university and all the trade schools, so it was older kids coming in. Through that period of time, there was a flush of federal money and we paved every road in Newfoundland. The students, because they were older, were driving to school. There were many reasons why we lost passengers.
All winter, the car rental companies were offering rental for $50 weekend — pick it up at three o'clock on Friday afternoon and return it at eight o'clock on Monday morning. A student going to Grand Falls can rent a car for $50 and get four of his buddies to pay $25 each. That student would make $25. He could go home with that brand new car and drive his girlfriend around all weekend and have $25 to spend on her. What is wrong with that? Where did the passengers go? You could see strings of cars going out on a Friday afternoon. You go around to the car dealerships and there would not be a car there.
Then the fishery collapsed in Newfoundland and ma and pa were getting all kinds of good money out of the federal government. They had nothing to do, so they were driving in. It was a great chance to go to St. John's, do a bit of shopping, look in the big stores. They would come in and pick Janey up and take her home, and they would bring her back again on Sunday. Where did the passengers go? That is where they went.
Pricing might have had something to do with it. The pricing is not that much greater now than it was then. It has increased, no question. However, we did not chase the passengers away.
Then there were the ``free'' airfares as I call them. It was $99 return. I could give away every seat I have on the bus tomorrow morning if I could turn around at the end of the month and send the federal government a bill. I would love to do that. I would have all my buses full. I would have all new buses too. Everybody who would want to get on could get on. However, we are playing in the field where, if you don't make money, you are out of business.
The bigger operators will survive because they have more money coming in from different areas. If I have three buses and all I am doing is a charter every now and then, I cannot compete with a company that has 70 buses and does charter work, line haul, tours and everything else. That is not because they want to, it is because, if you want to stay in business today, you have to have many functions and money coming in from all sources. If somebody else is taking some of your money, you have not got it.
The Chairman: Your main recommendation, I suppose, would be not to deregulate.
Mr. Harding: I would think you would assume that.
Mr. Forrestall: Do you have any other complaints?
Mr. Harding: I do not have any complaints. I just want to be deregulated. I want to stay in business. I want to stay working.
The Chairman: We hope you will.
Mr. Harding: I want Eastern Canada to be looked after.
The Chairman: We have not reached to any conclusions yet.
Mr. Harding: That is why I am here.
The Chairman: It will take a while before we make our recommendations.
Mr. Harding: I would like to see that in the next 20 years.
The Chairman: You said that you have a licence from Ontario.
Mr. Harding: We have bought out two companies in Ontario.
The Chairman: Was it difficult to get a licence in Ontario?
Mr. Harding: Those licences were from an existing company. We applied for a licence in Ontario and, while we were waiting for a response, a small company came up with eight licences, and we bought it. Another guy who had applied a year before got some licences but he had no buses, and he had no money to buy buses. We bought out his operation, and then we got our own licence. We really did not have to spend the money in the long term, but in the short term we had to protect what we wanted to do. We operated a lot of tours out of Newfoundland, terminating in Ontario. We had to have pick up and drop off rights in order to continue to do the things we were doing. We were protecting our rear end, and I guess we spent money that we maybe did not have to. We did not spend $100,000 like some other people do. We are not rich. It is only a certain cult on P.E.I. that has that kind of money. I think they get it from the federal subsidies on potatoes.
The Chairman: You are not against safety regulations.
Mr. Harding: I am the safest person in the world. I really support safety.
The Chairman: What about economic regulations?
Mr. Harding: I support those too, all the regulations.
The Chairman: That is what I wanted you to say. Are the differences between the provincial bus regimes detrimental to the industry?
Mr. Harding: You mean in regards to specific compliance?
The Chairman: In different provinces, yes.
Mr. Harding: You mean the safety compliance?
The Chairman: No, no, the economic aspect. It can vary from one province to another.
Mr. Harding: Yes, it does. The economic environment in Nova Scotia in regard to the motorcoach industry means that you can make investments here because you have confidence. You are protected. In Newfoundland, there is no way you can spend a lot of money to procure new coaches because there is absolutely no protection. If somebody wants to come in tomorrow morning and put 10 coaches in Newfoundland, they can. If Coach Canada wants to come down next summer and put 30 coaches in Newfoundland, they can. They cannot do it in Nova Scotia. Basically, if deregulation comes to Nova Scotia, it will cost Nova Scotians. Nova Scotians will lose jobs. All the people who are working with us and the other operators here will not have jobs because of the operator from outside. Their buses and their drivers will come in and they will be gone come October when it dries up. In Newfoundland it is wide open. It is really difficult to operate in Newfoundland because of the one-horse barn that operates himself, drives himself, washes the bus himself. It is difficult to compete. In Nova Scotia we are on a level playing field in that regard.
The Chairman: Are the differences detrimental to the travelling public?
Mr. Harding: I do not think so. I can argue both sides of it. If you had deregulation here, you could probably get someone to run a charter for $500, but they will be doing it on a 20-year old coach. Everybody has their tariffs, and you have to charge your tariff. There are people here in this room today who will make sure I charge my tariff. I would not dare mention anyone's name.
The Chairman: You are all friends.
Mr. Harding: They are not my friends.
Senator Oliver: I would like to know what is so unique about busing that the normal forces of the marketplace cannot come into play. For instance, if you want to have a hamburger, you can go out and there is Wendy's, and there is McDonald's. If you want to buy a car and you walk into any motor vehicle salesroom, you can choose between a Chev, a General Motors vehicle, a Ford, or a Toyota. They sales centres all in the same area, and they all compete directly against one another. They are making money. Why should need not be determined by the marketplace? Why should a regulator determine need?
Mr. Harding: Strange that you say that. When I was home over Christmas I looked for a new car. At every car dealership I went to, the cars were in the same price range, within $50. Somebody within the organization is making sure the prices stay the same. As for the motorcoach industry, I do not have to have a $550,000 coach. With deregulation, I do not have to run a scheduled line haul. Nobody does. If an operator wants to maintain a scheduled line haul operation in Atlantic Canada today, he has to have security in the summertime to be able to do the work that offsets some of the costs in the wintertime.
Very few line haul operations are stand-alone. Is a line haul operation one bus, once a day, each way? That is a line haul operation. That is a mandated operation. What happens when 400 people show up? What happen if 350 students show up on mid-term break? Do you take the first 50 and tell the others to go home and try again tomorrow? What happens then when you go to every stop across the island, and there are 36 of them, and you little old Mrs. Magilicutty has just come up from 40 miles down the coast, on the road all night, and we pull in and say, ``Sorry, Ms Magilicutty, there is no room. Go back and try again tomorrow''? That is a deregulated atmosphere. Right now if we need four coaches, we put four coaches on. If we need seven coaches, we put seven coaches on. When we pull into Gander and Mrs. Magilicutty is there and the driver calls in and says, ``I do not have any seats for Mrs. Magilicutty. What do I do?'' You then ask, ``Who is off on the count, and where? Get a taxi for Mrs. Magilicutty and move her up to the next stop, our cost. When you get a seat, you put her on the bus.'' That is the regime we are in now. Do you think that would ever happen in a deregulated regime? Not a chance.
Senator Oliver: Tell me, in a deregulated regime, what kind of a guideline, not a regulation, would we need in a place like Nova Scotia to ensure that Mrs. Magilicutty who lives in Pugwash or Parrsboro or Inverness where they do not have bus service now could get into the urban centre to get to the doctor?
Mr. Harding: Total regulation, what you have now, is what you need.
Senator Oliver: That was not my question. My question was: Without total regulation but just with certain government guidelines, making suggestions, what would some of those suggestions have to be to ensure that Mrs. Magilicutty could get into town?
Mr. Harding: I hope that Mrs. Magilicutty is on welfare and the government will pay for her to get in by taxi because she is not going to get in any other way. No operator will send a bus down to pick her up 35, 40 or 50 miles off the road. That is certain. It is not the operator's requirement or necessity to meet social problems. That is the federal government's responsibility. If Mrs. Magilicutty is in a community that is not serviced, somebody else has the responsibility, the same as they have with Health and Welfare to get her out of it.
Senator Oliver: What about seniors, students on fixed income, seniors on fixed incomes and the disabled who cannot drive their own motor vehicles? Do you have any responsibility for them?
Mr. Harding: I have all the sympathy in the world for those people, and I would do anything for people who are challenged in any way. If I could do anything for them, I would. If I could make them all the same as we are, I would. I do not have that power. In my opinion, every person in Canada should have the ability to travel. There should be no restrictions because a person is poor. However, that cannot be the responsibility of the operator. That is a social problem. Somewhere along the line, all levels of government, provincial, federal and municipal, have a responsibility to ensure that the social needs of everyone are met.
Senator Oliver: I am of the opinion that business also has certain social responsibilities.
Mr. Harding: We take that responsibility.
Senator Oliver: Most businesses that I know of exercise those social responsibilities by doing things for people who are disabled and have special needs.
Mr. Harding: We do that now by offering half rates for people who cannot tend to themselves. We do that by offering one full rate and the attendant travels free. We make huge contributions. When we purchase an ``accessible'' coach, an MC9, we lose the whole baggage bay. In the new coaches, the H345s, we lose two-thirds of the baggage bay. Someone mentioned package delivery. We want to do that, because that is cream. The bus is going down the road anyway and if we put the package on, we get paid for it.
There is a balancing act. An accessible coach with the baggage bay gone, coach cannot handle 47 passengers or, in the case of an MC9, 56 passengers. We need to run a second coat at peak periods. That is a contribution.
Senator Callbeck: I understood you to say that Ontario was headed towards deregulation but now they are pulling back.
Mr. Harding: Ontario was taking an approach toward deregulation. The province wanted to throw it open to the marketplace and let the marketplace dictate. They saw a lot of coaches operators coming into the business. I stand to be corrected, but I think in North America, the U.S. and Canada, last year, 53 motorcoach companies went out of business, went bankrupt. If 53 operators go out of business, it means there is something wrong. We are not making enough money to make ends meet. If we increase rates for the line haul, there is a hue and cry. If we do a tour or run a charter everybody sees that I have an older bus. How come all these people have new buses? It is because they can pay for them. As soon as we have new buses parked in the yard, we use them. That is a contribution. That happens when people pay higher rates.
A lot of the longstanding motorcoach companies in Ontario were in trouble, so they decided that they had to tighten it up, and they did.
Senator Callbeck: Is Newfoundland totally deregulated?
Mr. Harding: They were never totally deregulated. There was a huge concern about the line haul in Newfoundland. They knew that if they deregulated, CN — I was part of it at the time — the service would be one bus each way each day, and that would be it. You deregulate so people will come in. That is fine. With deregulation, if somebody starts to service an area between Cornerbrook and Grand Falls, we will not do it. The province decided to keep the corridor regulated. However, the tour and charter service was totally deregulated.
Prior to that an outside company could get a permit to bring in three tours a year. At that time the big companies, Acadian Lines and Nova Charters, could get a permit three times a year to bring a tour group into Newfoundland and that was it. CN at that time had the bulk of the tour business in Newfoundland. When they deregulated the next year, we could have gotten by with 13 or 14 coaches because Nova and Acadian were in there. Every time we turned around, there was a different coach company in Newfoundland, which did not happen prior to deregulation. Deregulation of the tour industry or the charter industry allowed these people to come in and do this work in the summertime. How many coaches did we see in there after October? None. We were the only ones operating. Then the province told us, ``You must have 15 coaches. You have all these students to move.'' Our response was, ``Why would we keep 15 coaches for five days a year? You allowed everybody else to come in and take the charter work. Why would you expect us to keep fifteen coaches?''
Senator Callbeck: What year did they deregulate tour and charter operations?
Mr. Harding: It was about 1991. They deregulated everything except the ``Trans Canada corridor'' as they called it, in other words, the line haul operation. They have amended that three or four times since. Now, I think it reads that you are not allowed to carry passengers over the corridor if you pick them up within 15 kilometres of the corridor. It also reads that you are not allowed to transport passengers over the corridor. I do not know if it is unenforceable or if they do not want to enforce it, but it is not being enforced. There are vans and school-type buses running all over the place in Newfoundland. To me that is a result of the province deregulating and then not having the intestinal fortitude to enforce its own rules. That is always a fear with deregulation.
Senator Callbeck: I want to ask you about safety. I understood you to say that in Newfoundland there is no safety inspection.
Mr. Harding: There is a requirement for fitness. The bottom line is I can have my coach inspected at a corner service station if he has a motor vehicle inspection certificate. In Nova Scotia, the inspectors come into our garage and they go through our buses with, I call it a ``mouse catcher,'' a fine-toothed comb. They do a good job, and I have no problem with that. They protect everybody.
There are other sides to safety that no one has mentioned. There is no requirement for pre-trip inspections on minibuses. There is no requirement for mandatory insurance. There is no requirement for inspections by the URB. There are also no requirements for the drivers to fill out log sheets to comply with the hours-of-service legislation. Who is to say that the driver sitting behind the wheel of the 7-passenger van has not been driving for 28 hours? There is more to safety than just the vehicle inspection. It covers the whole regime. They must comply with all the provisions the Motor Carrier Act. Below nine passengers, including the driver, that is all out the window. The driver could drive from here to Quebec and turn around and drive back again. There are no restrictions.
Senator Callbeck: Do you want all of these vans to be subject to the same inspections?
Mr. Harding: I would like to see everything that transports a passenger on the highway system regulated, yes.
Senator Callbeck: I understand that, because Newfoundland is partially deregulated and is going to be totally deregulated, you are not interested in investing any more in motorcoaches or vans. Is that correct?
Mr. Harding: I am not sure I understand your question. Are you asking me if I am not interested in buying new coaches because of deregulation?
Senator Callbeck: Yes.
Mr. Harding: No, I am not. The reason we buy new coaches in Newfoundland is that the line haul is regulated. We know when we buy these coaches that we have the line haul. If they deregulate the line haul, we will not be buying $550,000 coaches. An exercise that I did back some years ago showed that 82 per cent of our people got on from Grand Falls to St. John's.
Senator Callbeck: Would you be interested in running buses and vans and so on in Newfoundland like, for example, Trius is doing in Prince Edward Island, which is deregulated?
Mr. Harding: I do not think Trius is running vans.
Senator Callbeck: They are running motorcoaches and buses. They have some vans.
Mr. Harding: Yes, but I think you also heard Mr. Brookins say that, without Nova Scotia and Halifax, he would not be in business. I think he said that the deregulated atmosphere in P.E.I. made it very difficult, if not impossible, to be in business.
Senator Donald H. Oliver (Acting Chairman) in the Chair.
The Acting Chairman: He also said that he had the other six months to give full service to his customers.
Mr. Harding: Yes, Mr. Brookins has 18 coaches. Some of those 18 coaches are parked for six months in the wintertime. We have as many as 35 parked. You will find out that the other large operator has quite a few buses parked too. We have to find places to put them, like down in Florida or Miami, and that is why we are down there. It is not because we like being there.
Senator Forrestall: I want to ask about passenger list manifests and your parcel service. Have you had any conversations with the federal authorities or your own provincial authorities about moving towards providing a passenger manifesto?
Mr. Harding: To the best of my knowledge, we have not discusses passenger manifestos with anyone. The main reason we provide Rollpack is because of the transportation of dangerous commodities legislation. We are not allowed to haul a dangerous commodity on our bus. We require a manifest to show that you as a shipper are telling me there is no dangerous commodity being transported.
Senator Forrestall: That is what I understood from the last question.
Senator Jaffer: What if vans had to comply with economic and safety regulations? Earlier Mr. Pearce spoke about feeder routes or routes that are not served. Could you see a use for vans in those areas?
Mr. Harding: There is definitely a place for vans to feed commuter routes, that is, bring passengers to a main terminal. I do not have a problem with vans running anywhere, so long as the vans apply to the URB, as we do, for a licence to operate in this area from point A to point B. I have no problem with it as long as they go through the hearing process that we go through and give clear evidence to the board that there is a need for this service. The board, it its wisdom will give them a licence or the authority to do it. Provided they do all the same things we do, I have no problem competing with vans.
Someone asked about the marketing aspect. If everybody has an operating authority, everybody follows the same rules and regulations, and everybody is on the same playing field, I have no problem with someone operating a van, none whatsoever.
Senator Lise Bacon (Chairman) in the Chair.
The Chairman: Thank you, Mr. Harding, for being with us this afternoon.
Mr. Harding: I enjoyed being here. Thank you.
The Chairman: I would just reiterate that no conclusion has been reached.
Mr. Harding: As long as you got my message, everything else is window dressing. Keep it regulated.
The Chairman: Our next witness is from the Tourism Industry Association of Nova Scotia, Mr. Brian Hicks.
Mr. Brian Hicks, IT Coordinator, Tourism Industry Association of Nova Scotia: At the outset, I would like to convey the regrets of Ms Judith Cabrita, our managing director. Unfortunately, she had an engagement that took her out of town and is unable to attend today. I was asked to step in in her place.
I would like to start by welcoming the committee to Halifax and encourage you all to extend your visit, if you can. Eat, drink, and be merry, and maybe even shop a little bit.
The Tourism Industry Association of Nova Scotia was established in 1977 as a not-for-profit organization. Our mission is to lead, support, represent, and enhance the Nova Scotia tourism industry. TIANS is a trade organization for the business of tourism. It represents a united voice for improved and increased competitiveness on the part of Nova Scotia tourism businesses in the global marketplace. TIANS is the voice and the provincial advocate for the eight sectors of tourism. TIANS is also the tourism Human Resource Sector Council for Nova Scotia, and a board member of the Acadian Tourism Resource Council. Our association engages in activities that support the development and enhancement of tourism businesses. TIANS promotes policies that embrace free enterprise and industry-driven solutions. TIANS Transportation Committee regularly reviews and recommends strategies to various stakeholders regarding the improvement and enhancement of transportation infrastructure relating to the industry here in Nova Scotia, and occasionally federally.
In 2002, TIANS will manage a tour wholesaler marketplace, targeting North American motorcoach companies to purchase the Atlantic Canada tourism product. One of our tag lines is ``Ensure the future...The business of tourism.'' Tourism is an industry that supports and sustains both rural and urban communities. Vitally important to our industry's health is the operation of a wide variety of public transportation systems. TIANS firmly supports any initiative that would encourage motorcoach passenger growth, framed in a context of environmentally sound options for the travelling public.
TIANS piloted and presently manages the implementation of a national strategy to encourage the recreational vehicle travelling public to adopt environmentally friendly waste treatment practices. Our association would be pleased to partner with any group of stakeholders wishing to pursue a greener future for the motorcoach industry, which is already green by its nature.
The tourism industry in Nova Scotia is a billion-dollar-plus economic engine supporting more than 35,000 jobs. It is one of our healthiest sectors and one not in decline as is the case in many other sectors.
In reviewing the regulations affecting the motorcoach industry, it is important that the voice of the tourism industry be heard. TIANS calls for nationally uniform motorcoach regulations on vehicle safety and insurance liability for all operations, operators engaged in carrying paid passengers, regardless of the vehicle size or type. Motorcoach safety and adequate liability protection are paramount in serving travellers, be they residents or visitors.
Provincial disparity across the country in motorcoach regulations has created barriers to opportunity and growth, particularly here in Atlantic Canada. In Nova Scotia the marketplace allows non-Nova Scotia tour operators to operate with vehicles — not large motorcoaches — and pull trailers without conforming to rules currently in place for resident tour operators.
Federal leadership is required to amend the act governing commercial transportation of people and goods in all areas of Canada and to ensure national standards are implemented for the travelling public.
As an organization, we firmly believe that most solutions, successful ones in the long term, involve a market-driven strategy. TIANS believes customer-centric marketplace solutions have always delivered sustainable growth and development for all industries and sectors. We are aware that the motorcoach industry continues to see declining passenger loads. What is needed is a national strategy that addresses the benefits the motorcoach travel, encourages the improvement of service and quality levels, and is conveniently intermodal.
Over-regulation of any transportation mode has not proved a sound solution. One has only to look of the airline industry to see the results of where are today. Federal subsidies to the rail system have added to the challenges faced by the motorcoach industry and operators. Consideration should be given to a public awareness campaign, in partnership with the transportation stakeholders, to encourage motorcoach travel as an alternative to other forms of transportation. As an example, messages could be targeted to encompass the environmental benefits of group travel.
Research initiatives with motorcoach stakeholders and users of the system should define the obstacles and incentives that the private sector can address. I do not think government intervention is always the solution to a problem. TIANS would welcome an opportunity to assist in this area.
Nova Scotia's international visitors expect to find a convenient and inter-connected public system of travel available to them. They are used to that in their home markets. Motorcoach is currently the only public transportation available to visit many communities in Nova Scotia. From a tourism perspective, the provision of transportation from community to community is an added advantage and encourages destination development.
In conclusion, regulatory initiatives should be exclusively focussed on public safety and liability protection. Ad hoc province-by-province policy in a key transportation sector is not benefiting the tourism industry as a whole. The federal government should take the lead in the development of a national strategic program that would encourage motorcoach as an inter-modal option, while assisting the industry and the provinces to develop a pro-active, marketplace-driven solution. A national framework that ensures good customer service and eliminates barriers, will benefit all Canadians and ensure that the travelling public is well served.
The Chairman: Mr. Hicks, are the differences between the provincial bus regimes, which have developed over the last decade, detrimental to the industry or to the travelling public?
Mr. Hicks: I think, in some cases they are detremental to both. The travelling public has certain levels and expectations of service, and those are different in different marketplaces. I will give you an example. If you are travelling by motorcoach in Nova Scotia now, in some cases you will be dropped off on the highway, in all weathers, to find your own way to your final destination. People coming from large urban centres where the motorcoach industry is much more developed, profitable, and sustainable, get much better service levels than that.
How is it detrimental to the industry? I suspect that operators in our area, having to cross-subsidize the operation of long or scheduled routes from their charter business, cannot be as competitively priced as operators in other parts of the country or the U.S., that are strictly operating a tour business and not having to cross-subsidize rural transportation networks.
Looking ahead, the world faces higher energy costs. The infrastructure, our roads, will require major investments. We are trying to do more with less all the time. If you continually look to solutions that are artificially supported, where operators — it is not an economic incentive, it is an economic must — have to lose money in a particular aspect of their operation, you must wonder how sustainable it is and wonder where we will end up in the future. Will we end up with no players left standing? I think a balance has to be reached with regard to looking after the public good. Earlier Senator Oliver mentioned the right of people to go from small communities to visit their doctors. There are, potentially, solutions that can be marketplace driven out there and that may not require the use of a 50-seat coach. If the industry can work that out within a balanced framework, where the customer, ultimately, is the driving force, there is much more chance of success than there would be with a group of people sitting around in a committee and determining that one community gets two buses a week and another one gets one.
I take my hat of to your committee, because many of these problems are a provincial responsibility. Perhaps your committee could lead, that is, take the best of what is working in regulated, semi-regulated and non-regulated, and recommend those as best practices. Then each provincial department of transportation would have some idea of where they fit in and what their policies are doing, that is, whether they are hurting there own transportation sector, or holding back development. If that kind of initiative moves forward, and we have a relatively level playing field across the country, it would definitely be better for the travelling public looking for long haul, regularly scheduled service. Ultimately, it will be better for our visitors who use coach and tour services and group travel.
The Chairman: Yesterday, we were told there was no decline in scheduled bus ridership, but today some of our witnesses are saying that there has been a decline and other are saying that there has not been a decline. What is your opinion on that?
Mr. Hicks: Realistically, one would have to go back to the 1960s and the advent of the automobile, highway development and intercity travel. Lots of people are driving themselves or finding other ways to reach their destinations. especially over long-haul routes, where an aircraft can get you there in hours and not a day. I saw a submission from our department of transportation indicating that there have been some fairly severe declines in passenger loads in Nova Scotia. I do not think that could be argued over. A lot of people have moved away from bus transportation for one reason or another.
Perhaps we can find programs and incentives to encourage customers to use the bus to get from point A to point B. The idea that the cheapest service wins all the time is not true. It has never been a successful model of marketing in any business enterprise. You can buy market share with a cheap seat, but you do not get to hang onto it forever because you are losing your shirt. It is not sustainable.
The Chairman: Is the decline in ridership in scheduled intercity buses a consequence of a strong charter presence on the market?
Mr. Hicks: No, I think it is more connected, again, to the private automobile and the convenience that most people look to now when they make their travel plans. They can go when they want and not be dependent on, say, Tuesdays at five. I think that the people who uses the buses are those who do not have their own private automobile. Without doing any market research, that would be my best guess.
Senator Oliver: I have a general question about tourism. I read an article the other day about what people in North America are now looking for in some of their vacations. Some of them are looking for a ``real farm experience.'' They want to go to a farm for a day, a weekend, or a week, with their family where they can see pigs and chickens and live out in the country. That is becoming a major destination.
Are you looking at ways to facilitate this new trend that is emerging from the United States and some parts of Canada, so that we could benefit from it in Nova Scotia? If so, how would you arrange to get the people there? Are you considering any new incentives to some of the bus carrier operators in Nova Scotia to do that?
My other question is, if you are thinking of ways to transport people into and out of rural areas, is that one way that we might be able to find that the busing system can be used as a way of getting people in remote and rural areas of Canada into the urban areas?
Mr. Hicks: There are many cooks in the kitchen with regard to how we develop the tourism product and branding here in Nova Scotia. In fact, we even have national partners, the Canadian Tourism Commission, in some cases working on initiatives in agri-tourism, aboriginal tourism products.
Market studies have shown that today's tourist is very different from the visitor of 50 years ago. They are much more experientially oriented. They do not want to look at pretty pictures and take pretty pictures, they want to be in the picture, so to speak. Many of our tourism operators have discovered this market already, and provide the gamut from accommodation to adventure tourism. This is not new. We are very actively working through a variety of DMOs, Destination Marketing Organizations, to build that brand, where we are strong. Nova Scotia is a pretty amazing place to visit. We have endless tourism potential here. We are keeping an eye on the bouncing ball. We do not want uncontrolled developments; we want sustainability.
Senator Oliver: Are you building up a little fund in your budget to help subsidize some of the busing companies to get into some of these remote areas?
Mr. Hicks: No.
Senator Oliver: That is what I am getting at.
Mr. Hicks: We have thought that perhaps encouraging a tour operator to start running regular tours to, say, the Parrsboro area, where there are beautiful mineral deposits. Logistically, it would be difficult to tag along unpredictable passenger loads. How many seats would you keep empty for potentially local residents, who might want to take that coach back? From a logistical point of view, I do not see that being easily achieved.
However, I believe some of the local unregulated van operators here, in the province are already carrying visitors, tourists, not just residents in mini-vans to Parrsboro, for example. You could say, in that case, that the visitor load helps that mini-van operator's market. To ask people to wear multiple hats in customer service delivery is sometimes to ask for complications and problems in customer service.
The real challenge we face here in Nova Scotia is how to maintain a good, local, long-haul service into all the communities, or as many communities as we can with large coaches. That is not an easy one. The package business is cross-subsidizing the cost of running the coach. If the company is also in the tour business, that is helping to offset that. It is not an easy issue to resolve. You cannot just abandon communities. I think in the local workings of the marketplace, perhaps the solution is not found in running the 50-passenger coach to some communities.
Senator Oliver: Is the mini van a solution?
Mr. Hicks: Yes. The question is: Who will deliver that? Will it be the large coach company that has the mini van division? I think that is a marketplace initiative that will work its way out. He who charges the cheapest price is not always going to win. He who gives the best customer service wins.
Senator Callbeck: This morning we heard from Mr. Campbell of Atlantic Tours Grey Line who indicated that he felt that the industry is a very poor marketer. The airline industry spends millions to promote its industry, as does the cruise line industry. However, that does not seem to apply to the motorcoach industry. What would you say about that?
Mr. Hicks: In fairness, yes, that is a fair statement to make. It is an important segment of our tourism product which is growing, especially in the delivery of coaches to large cruise ships. Every year our cruise ship traffic is increasing, to an extent that we are straining some of our resources, especially when we try to park 60 coaches in Peggy's Cove.
I do not think that the motorcoach touring market is in decline. There are as many people and probably more than there were. As all of us baby boomers age and eventually want to travel on vacation by coach, on what they call ``fixed- itinerary tours.'' That market will continue to grow for quite a while.
The industry here is not large. There are not 50 operators as there are in Ontario. We have only a handful. There are probably limited resources and it is probably fair to say that there is limited coordination. It is an initiative that falls first and foremost to our own department of tourism, an agency, a council, called the Nova Scotia Tourism Partnership Council, to identify if that is a weakness, to bring that to their attention and to get some marketing dollars to help with that. A lot of what is being done in the industry is really trench warfare. You go to large travel shows as a coach operator, you meet and greet, you talk, and you build relationships. I believe the same approach is taken quite successfully with the cruise industry on the part of a lot of the motorcoach operators.
Senator Callbeck: Denis Campbell, if I remember correctly, said that the figures were declining but, he said that in Nova Scotia, that cannot be because he tripled his business in seven years.
Mr. Hicks: As you have heard from people today, we have two provincial motorcoach companies, both of whom are now operating in Nova Scotia. They say that this is generating a significant part of their revenue, vis-à-vis home operations. Obviously, we have a billion dollar industry here, and we have some pretty strong product in the cruise sector.
Senator Jaffer: Did September 11 affect the tourism industry here?
Mr. Hicks: We did a survey of our roughly 1,100 members. The bulk of our membership would come from the accommodation sector. The impact in the short term was significant. Businesses took extreme financial hits, some were just about brought to their knees. The study we did indicated that there was an immediate business impact and then there was recovery the following month. For a lot, the recovery was slower. We have a very strong fall tourism season here. Although those events did have an impact, it was, eventually, not as great as it was in the first four weeks. We did hold large meetings of thousands of people, although some meetings were cancelled.
At times, my job is to look after a lot of our information technology and deal with the needs of our industry. Web statistics are awesome this year, and the numbers are increasing. Inquiries are up. We are anticipating a fairly strong year. I think we have some wonderful advantages. We are close to home for a lot of the folks who will visit us. We are safe. We are clean, and if we do not have another war and we do not see fuel prices doubling and any of the other things that have large-scale impacts on people's propensity to travel, then I think we will have a pretty awesome year.
Senator Jaffer: With the tendency of people, especially in the U.S., to be reluctant to go abroad, the choice could be Canada.
Mr. Hicks: Yes. The 10,000 or so people who were stranded here and who ultimately continued their trip, became incredible ambassadors for our province. One of our staff at a convention in Nevada was basically hugged by two or three other delegates who had friends or family stranded in Halifax on September 11. Word of mouth has a lot of power.
Senator Forrestall: The Canadian government produced a publication called ``Great Friends,'' and it was based on what Canada did after September 11.
Mr. Hicks: They like to document these things.
Senator Forrestall: We took down probably 100 of these coffee table books, and they were gone in two or three days. The Canadian government will make a fortune on this publication, selling it in the United States. You never know where publicity will come from.
The Chairman: Thank you very much.
Mr. Hicks: I would like to remind you all that Halifax is a wonderful dining and entertainment capital.
The Chairman: That is why we come back here. Thank you.
The next witnesses are from the Ecology Action Centre, Ms Stephanie Sodero, and Ms Alexandra Fischer.
Ms Stephanie Sodero, TRAX Coordinator, Active and Safe Routes to School Coordinator, Ecology Action Centre: My co-worker, Alexandra Fischer and I work for the TRAX project at the Ecology Action Centre. TRAX stands for Transportation Halifax. We work towards sustainable transportation. By ``sustainable'' we mean biking, bus use, walking, car pooling. that is our day job.
I was asked to encourage students to speak today but, unfortunately, it is spring break, so I only have two written comments to read. Is that okay?
The Chairman: Yes.
Ms Sodero: Based on the minutes that I have received, I understand that you have two main questions: Why has bus use declined, assuming that it has; and, how do we increase bus use?
To address the first question, why has bus use declined, my family has a home in Whycocomagh, Cape Breton which, as any of you who have been to Cape Breton will know, is gorgeous. You can go canoeing and swimming. My family meets down there every summer. Not being a car driver or a car owner, I want to get down there on my vacation and I want to spend as little time getting there as possible. To get there, if I take the bus, it takes five and a half hours, and it costs me $48.59. If I take a van shuttle, it takes only four hours and it costs me only $40.00. You ask: Why has bus use declined? That is one answer. There is competition in other sectors, not among the bus users. I use the van to go there. It is faster. It is less expensive. It offers more individualized service. It can drop me off at my door sometimes. It drops me off closer to where I live, and it is even more fun to sit on a van. People on the van tend to talk more in a van pool, whereas on a bus you tend to just stick to yourself a bit more, I find. It is safe.
I was reading Mr. Gow of Transport 2000 who made some comments at a previous session about safety. In my experience in Nova Scotia at least, van shuttles are very safe.
Environmentally, and that is the perspective from which I speak, a full van shuttle is better than a half empty bus. The service, by the way, is the same for both buses and vans going from, say, Whycocomagh to Halifax. We have six or seven vans going from Cape Breton to Halifax each day. However, it is probably better to have one full bus rather than six or seven shuttles, but the shuttles offer more convenience, more flexibility in the times they leave, and the places they pick up and drop off.
With regard to both bus and van shuttles, there is an issue of price. Working for an NGO, I do not travel as much as I might otherwise. The cost is restrictive.
However, from an environmental perspective, this is not necessarily a bad thing. The previous speaker talked about tourism and wanting people to travel. Environmentally, we are encouraging people, if they do travel, say, for vacations, to stay a little closer to home rather than flying across the world. The further you go, the greater the environmental impact.
I went to a conference in Tatamagouche, Nova Scotia, a couple of weekends ago. There was no way I could get there without a car. There was no bus. There is no train, and there is no van service. I was stuck. I was fortunate that I could carpool with somebody. However, from a social equity point of view, somebody who cannot afford to own a car would be stuck.
You are also dealing with the issue of competition and whether deregulating would increase bus ridership. That is my rudimentary understanding of the issue. My feeling is that the competition is not between buses but actually between buses and cars, or buses and van pooling, or buses and airplanes. Cars are more comfortable, more convenient and more expensive but, once you have arrived at your destination, the costs are often outweighed by the benefits.
However, cars are the least environmentally sustainable mode of transportation. In Nova Scotia, $200 million is spent annually on health care costs related to car use. Only 33 per cent of Nova Scotian youth qualify as physically fit. Cars emit fossil fuel gasses, and that leads to global warming and climate change. They cause noise pollution and air pollution, habitat loss and a myriad of other problems.
How do we increase bus use? Of course, that leads to the question of whether we should increase bus use. In terms of social and environmental equity, there should be a means of getting around that is not based on car use. Given that answer, how do we increase bus use?
Van pooling, in my particular case, offers a better service. Perhaps buses could start to offer van pool services. Van pools could service the more rural routes and then feed into the larger, more mainstream route.
To ratify Kyoto, we would put in place a whole series of incentives to increase energy conservation, decrease fossil fuel consumption, and decrease the fuel tax on buses or vans. That is done in Quebec. We would invest in intercity transit. When I get to a city, I usually meet somebody who can drive me around, but it would be nice if there were a dependable bus system in the city.
Encouraging bus use is the flip side of discouraging car use. One way of doing that would be to increase the price of driving to reflect its true costs. An engineering professor at Dalhousie, Larry Hughes, estimates that $3,340 per vehicle needs to be added to the cost of each vehicle in Nova Scotia to reflect the social and environmental costs not captured in the prices that a driver pays. This could involve increasing the fuel tax, and putting a higher tax on larger, more polluting vehicles such as SUVs.
In conclusion, to address social and environmental equity, there should be mass transit servicing all areas, urban and rural. Whether it is done by van, train or bus is irrelevant. The answer probably lies in a combination of all three.
Competition is not among bus companies but between buses and cars, so if we want to increase ridership, we should get people out of cars. That is the main way to do it.
We received two written comments. Alex will read the first one.
Ms Alexandra Fischer, TRAX Coordinator, Active and Safe Routes to School Coordinator, Ecology Action Centre: This is a written comment we received from a Ph.D. student at the Department of Economics, Acadia University who asked me to pass on his brief comments to the committee. He wrote:
I ride the Acadian Lines bus from Wolfville to Halifax from time to time. I take the bus, rather than driving, because I am able to do some work on the bus. As an academic, I have work that is sufficiently portable to permit this. However, the service is far from ideal.
Problems I have with this service:
1) Cost. At $30 for a return trip, it is more expensive for me to take the bus than it is to drive. This high cost renders the bus as an option only for people who are not yet able to afford a car, or who can justify it as I do, an opportunity to work/sleep.
2) Inconvenient schedule. For persons such as myself, access to Halifax International Airport is important. To get to/from the airport from/to Wolfville, one must wait in Halifax for a connection. A trip to the airport takes at least three times as long as driving or renting a limo, and it is only possible at times that have no relation to flight times.
3) Station location. Getting from the bus station to Dalhousie University or Downtown (my destinations) is not easy. It is about a 45 minute walk downtown, and about a half hour to Dal. There does not seem to be any effort to coordinate city buses with either the Acadian Lines bus schedule, or to even provide a city bus that has a pickup handy to the bus station. As such, one must wait on Robie, regardless of the weather, and frequently for a long time, to catch a city bus.
4) Uncomfortable. Seats tend to be cramped and crammed close together. Riding on a full bus is not fun. It is less comfortable than a crowded airplane, and the ride is less smooth.
As an environmental economist, the only way that the environmental advantages of buses will be exploited is if people who ride the bus are subsidized by those who cause more damage to the environment. Note that there are a range of other benefits that are conferred by using the bus.
Easy solution (practically, not politically), put tolls on major roads. Use some of the revenue generated to subsidize buses (or trains). This would simultaneously increase the cost of taking a car trip and reduce the cost of a bus trip.
More difficult solution, effective and safe deregulation of busing. Buses must be safe, but competition must also be present. I'm not sure about NS, but in Ontario bus lines have monopoly rights on particular routes, and have even been able to shut down organized car pools which were seen as violating the `motor carrier act.'
Most difficult solution, long range development plans to prevent sprawl and provide critical densities required to make transit effective (all modes). This is probably the most important, and the least likely to occur.
Another solution, technology. The lowest cost per person transportation mode, when full, is rail. However, at low densities and low usage rates, it is not efficient. Part of the attraction of rail is the fact that it is a much more comfortable ride. Cities are currently using two unit articulating buses on busy routes. Could such technology be applied to long run buses? I imagine a `road train' much like is being used in truck transport. Two and three unit articulating buses that travel exclusively on highways. To be effective, such buses would require transfer stations built on the highways, and effective transit links from there to the centre of the nearby town.
Further, any solution that is going to promote buses must also separate the buses from traffic congestion. On four lane and greater highways, one lane must be for HOV/bus traffic only.
``HOV'' means ``high-occupancy vehicle. He goes on to state:
If buses must compete with the same congestion as the automobile, then the automobile is preferable, especially if it is cheaper, cleaner, roomier, and can take you to the door you want to get to.
Bottom line, marketing is not going to increase bus ridership. Bus (or rail or transit) ridership will only increase when the individuals sees a benefit to doing so. There are precious few people with the environmental consciousness to voluntarily inconvenience themselves to do what is right, when the overall impact of that right choice is minimal. We need to actively discriminate against the car by making those who use cars pay the full cost of using that car.
Ms Sodero: We received a second submission from another Ph.D. student. I asked him for his comments and he sent me eight pages, but I will only read the highlights. Wayne Groskzo was recently hired as the first cyclist and pedestrian coordinator for Halifax. He dedicates his time to figuring out where bike should lanes be in Halifax, and encouraging cycling.
Although the statistics show a decline in bus ridership over the past decades, I have a feeling this might begin to turn around. I can say that in my experience there seemed to be a very significant number of people on buses across the country this past summer. In general, my experiences of bus travel have been overwhelmingly positive. This is due in part to the friendliness and courtesy of many drivers, but mostly it's because of all the interesting people I've met and great conversations I've had on buses.
Senator Oliver: Do you have a copy of that that we could distribute?
Ms Sodero: I do not. I'm sorry.
The Chairman: You can read it.
Ms Sodero: I will just read two paragraphs from the eight pages. I hope Wayne will not mind.
I find it hard to imagine how more ``competition'' would be helpful to providing better inter-city bus transportation. Does this mean more different companies serving the same destinations? It doesn't make much sense to me to have two or more bus companies going to the same place. In theory, would these companies offer different prices and thus reduce fares? Would they just go at different times? I guess everywhere I've travelled in North America, I've only seen this situation once, with Greyhound and Red Arrow, which both travel between Edmonton and Calgary. I think different bus companies will primarily focus on different routes. So I guess I don't know if the regulation or lack of regulation has much effect on competition anyway.
The other paragraph is as follows:
I take long-distance buses a lot, and have a generally positive experience. I have explained some of my ideas earlier.
I will also add that I often bring a bicycle with me on buses and trains, to use the bicycle for local transportation at my destination. There are several barriers to bringing a bicycle — requirements that it be dismantled and put in a box, extra fees, and hassle. For myself, I have largely solved this problem by obtaining a ``travel bike'', which folds up into a small hockey bag. Even still, if the bus driver were to notice that the bag contains a bicycle, under current bus company policy the driver would be obliged to charge me extra for a ``bicycle'', even though it is no different from other luggage carried in duffle bags or hockey bags. I don't find this fair.
I think both the bus and train companies could attract another segment of passengers by being openly accommodating to cycle travellers. A bike rack on the back of the bus might not be too difficult to arrange.
The Chairman: What is the people's perception of public transit?
Ms Sodero: Of intercity transit?
The Chairman: We have your perception. How do you think people react to public transit?
Ms Fischer: Generally, people that I know in Halifax would associate it with being relatively expensive and inconvenient in terms of the schedule. There might be much to be gained by surveying customers to determine whether the schedules meet people's needs. I know from a recent trip from Moncton to Halifax, the return time was noon on a Sunday. Perhaps they could figure out the needs of customers going to and from major destinations like Halifax and making sure that they still can enjoy a Sunday at that destination. That type of thing might be one solution. People tend to perceive it as a longer, inconvenient and more expensive way to get to places.
The Chairman: Your TRAX project works to promote transportation options other than single occupancy car commuting. How have you done this, and have you been successful?
Ms Fischer: We have two main approaches. First, we work with large employers in the Halifax regional municipality, and we implement what we call ``trip reduction programs,'' where we promote the alternatives, not by preaching the environmental benefits of doing so, but by putting in place concrete incentives. We put in place things like on-site bus ticket sales. We try to push for automatic bus pass deductions from salaries. We have not achieved that yet, but that is one of our goals.
In terms of carpooling, we offer a free car pool matching service to employees and try to get designated parking spots for carpoolers on sites.
We also try to promote active transportation through a program that we implement with nurses where we actually measure the health benefits that people can gain from becoming more active. As a way to sell active transportation we actually work with the health sector as well.
The other component of our work, apart from the trip reduction programs, would be just general public education, outreach, as well as being a very active member of a number of committees, such as the Bike Ways Task Force, the Chamber of Commerce Transportation Committee, and a number of different transportation-related committees.
As to our success rate, I believe that we are seen as an important voice for sustainable transportation in Halifax. We work very closely with the transit authority, with traffic and transportation. We have quite a strong media presence as well, and we are doing quite a bit of public education. We certainly face a lot of barriers in terms of a lack of supportive policies and the skewed incentive structure which favours the car. With our trip reduction programs, we are starting to introduce new ideas in the Maritimes. This is something that no other organization has done yet here. It is slow going, but I think we are starting to make some steady progress.
The Chairman: Do you think increasing fuel taxes would really take people out of their cars? In Europe, for example, gasoline is sometimes three times the price it is here in Canada, and I do not think it has done anything to deter people from using their cars.
Ms Fischer: The statistics that we have indicate that there is a much higher rate of single occupancy car driving in North America. I think about 80 per cent of trips are made by car and something like 60 per cent are made by car in Europe. There are some statistics to suggest that fuel price is impacting the single-occupancy vehicle trips.
Cycling represents 1 per cent of Canadian trips and it is up to 20 to 30 per cent in some countries such as Denmark. I think fuel tax increases could have a significant impact.
The Chairman: Would you send us the statistics that you have you just mentioned?
Ms Fischer: Yes, I will.
The Chairman: What do you think is the role of the bus industry in Canada's overall strategy for dealing with environmental issues relating to transportation?
Ms Fischer: In terms of implementing the Kyoto Protocol relative to greenhouse gases or just environmental impacts in general?
The Chairman: Both.
Ms Fischer: I think that would be critical. Transportation is the number one source of greenhouse gas emissions, so tackling transportation is critical. Transit can only be competitive with the car if there is significant higher investment. Carpooling has proven to be quite a difficult sell, and cycling, realistically, can only be attractive to a small segment of the population. I see public transit as being one of the most critical alternatives to using the car. I would see investments in transit as being very important to addressing how Canada can meet its Kyoto commitments.
The Chairman: Do you want to add something, Ms Sodero?
Ms Sodero: The one other point I would mention relates to intercity busing. Cuba is holding a youth summit in May that has a largely environmental focus, so I think that them perceiving themselves as environmentally aware is progress.
Senator Oliver: My question is for Stephanie. I think the gist of your evidence related to vans, van pooling, and the use of feeder routes. You told us that when you had to go to your family estate in Cape Breton, you chose the smaller van rather than a bus because it was convenient and you would have conversations with other passengers. and you would have conversations with other passengers. You also said that it was faster and it was a better price. You are here representing the Ecology Action Centre so I would like to know if this vehicle that was convenient, cheaper, and faster and so on, burned diesel or gas?
Ms Sodero: That is a very good question. I do not know. I failed to ask that question. I could find that out for you.
Senator Forrestall: Should it be burning a fossil fuel?
Senator Oliver: That is the issue.
Ms Fischer: There would be significant progress if we could start moving towards hydrogen vehicles and that type of thing. I think that would certainly be an important part of meeting our commitments under Kyoto, but I also think that is only one part of the solution. The new technologies will solve many local air quality problems, but they will not solve the problems resulting from the fact that our population is not active enough. It will not solve the problems of congestion or of respiratory disease. It will not reduce the costs of car accidents. I think that certainly can be one aspect of the solution, but it is not comprehensive in and of itself.
Senator Oliver: My second question for Stephanie is: How many passengers did this van that you talked about hold, and was there a bathroom facility in the van? Was food available?
Ms Sodero: I think there were about 10 people. There was no bathroom facility that I was aware of, and the lunch I packed was the only food available to me. It was still comfortable, and there were stops along the way. We stopped at Tim Hortons, so facilities and services were available there.
Senator Callbeck: Stephanie, you mentioned that taking the van was cheaper. In taking that trip to your summer home, what was the difference in price between the van and the bus?
Ms Sodero: It was $40 for the van and $48.59 one-way on the bus, so $8.00.
Senator Callbeck: That is 20 per cent.
Ms Fischer: To compare the price of the bus and train, a recent trip I took to Moncton cost $89 by bus whereas it would have been $105 by train. The bus option was cheaper, but the van option is cheaper still.
Senator Callbeck: You mentioned deregulation and you went on to say that you felt the competition was between the buses and the cars and the airplanes. Are you for deregulation or not?
Ms Sodero: I tried to make sense of the document that I was e-mailed but it is a little above my understanding of the issue. I think of deregulation and privatization as being the same thing. In privatization, the main goal is to make money, and rural routes will not make money, so rural communities will not be serviced. Ridership will increase with privatization, because they will be servicing the most profitable routes, which are serviced anyway. In my understanding of the issue, I would lean towards regulation, or at least not privatization.
The Chairman: Thank you, Stephanie and Alexandra. We really appreciate having you here with us this afternoon.
Our next witness is from the P.E.I Senior Citizens' Federation Inc., Ms Olive Bryanton. From the Senior College of Prince Edward Island will be Mr. Ron Irving, who is president, and from Seniors Active Living Centre, Ms Connie Auld, who is president. As well we will hear from Ms Joan Lay who is the president of Canadian Pensioner's Concerned, Nova Scotia. Welcome to our committee.
Ms Olive Bryanton, Coordinator, P.E.I Senior Citizens' Federation Inc.: Thank you for this opportunity to present on behalf of seniors in our province. Three of us will be presenting and we will each focus on a different area.
My focus will be on the demographic and economic trends in P.E.I. and the Atlantic region. Connie will focus on the current situation on P.E.I. as we know it, as it relates to getting from point A to point B, and Ron will focus on current P.E.I. regulations and how appropriate busing service will help address the issues about our environment.
The federation is a provincial organization, the main objectives of which are to provide education for seniors, decision makers, and others interested in the aging process, to educate government and other decision-making bodies on issues that affect seniors' lives, and to help dispel the negative myths and stereotypes about the aged and aging.
I will focus on the demographic and economic trends and I will touch on the population aging, on the key demographic trends, key economic trends, and planning for the future.
The population of Atlantic Canada is one of the most rapidly aging populations in the world. In less than 40 years, nearly one out of three people will be 65 years of age or older. Our population will gradually age until 2011 and then it will increase at a very rapid pace until the year 2036, after which time the aging of the population will level off. The key message is that the aging of the population will not occur overnight. We know it is coming and we have time to plan and prepare.
One of the key demographic trends for this part of the country is the declining population growth. The population in Atlantic Canada is growing much more slowly than that of Canada as a whole, and that is expected to continue into the second and third decades of the new millennium. There is a growing number of seniors.
In 2011 when the earliest baby boomers turn 65, the elderly population will begin to grow very rapidly. By 2036, seniors will make up nearly one-third of the population of Atlantic Canada. In the 2000 estimate, those over 65 on P.E.I. represent 13.1 per cent of the overall population. According to the 1996 census, the highest percentage of seniors 65 and older live in Kings County, at 13.8 per cent compared to 12.7 per cent in Queens and 13 per cent in Prince. The percentage of senior women in all three counties is higher than senior men. The early reports of the 2001 census from Statistics Canada indicate that the population for P.E.I. has increased, and seniors 65 and over represent 13.3 per cent of the population. There are fewer younger people. Over the last thirty years, the under-20 population decreased rapidly in the region and is expected to continue to do so into the next century.
The old are getting older. The proportion of people over age 80 is growing rapidly. Over the past 30 years, while the over-65 population grew slowly, the over-80 population nearly doubled. By 2036, one tenth of the population will be 80 and over.
There are more older single women. The number of women over 80 is growing dramatically. By 2011 women over 80 will outnumber men two to one. Currently, women over 80 on P.E.I. outnumber men three to one, representing 66.8 per cent of that segment of the population. Since women generally outlive men, most women in the over-80 category will be single.
There is a rapidly aging rural region. Seniors are attracted to towns and villages that are service centres for rural regions. The smallest centres, those with populations between 1,000 and 10,000 inhabitants, have the highest level of population aging.
There is a smaller and older workforce. The Atlantic workforce has been growing more slowly than that of Canada and it will continue to decline. The migration of younger workers in search of employment further increases this trend.
I will speak a little bit about the dependency ratio because some people become very concerned about an aging population, and they think we are going to be the demise of our country. Let me set you at ease. The population dependency ratio for the Atlantic region has declined over the past 40 years. It was highest in 1956 at 2.2 per cent when the baby boomers were all children and entirely dependent on society. Currently, the population dependency ratio is very low at 1.6 per cent. The dependency ratio is expected to change very little in the next 15 to 20 years, and then it will increase to 1.9 per cent in 2036 as the baby boomers leave the workforce. The ratio suggests that, while the total cost to society, public and private, of a larger population of seniors will increase, the total cost of supporting a smaller youth population will decrease. The challenge will not be in managing the cost of an aging population, but rather it will be in managing the gradual shift from spending on youth to spending on seniors.
I will now touch on some of the economic trends. There is a changing economic base. The Atlantic region economy was traditionally based in rural communities on natural resources such as fisheries, forestry, mining, and farming. These industries have not done well recently and are being replaced by jobs in the knowledge and service industries which tend to be located near cities and require greater education. There is a weak economic growth in productivity. Overall productivity and economic growth have been declining since 1960, both in this region and across our country. There are fewer working men and more working women. The number of men working has dropped steadily since 1970. Early retirement is becoming more common and, over the same period, the number of women in the workforce has increased steadily.
There are fewer regular full-time jobs. Over the past 20 years, regular full-time jobs have declined while casual, part- time, contract, and self-employment has increased. With this shift to non-standard forms of employment comes lower incomes and reduced access to work-related benefits.
There is slower income growth and increasing inequality. The average disposable income growth has declined, and personal savings rates were close to zero in 1997. Since the mid-1970s, earnings of people with the lowest salaries have been dropping steadily, while earnings of those with the highest salaries have continued to rise.
According to our own province's provincial government's last statistical review, the highest number of people in the low-income brackets is unattached individuals. Many senior women are in this category, which shows that 49.1 per cent of unattached individuals have an income level of less than $15,000 a year. Furthermore, 63.5 per cent of unattached individuals have an income of less than $20,000.
In contrast, we find that in two-person families, only 17 per cent have under $20,000. In a family of three, it is 8.6 per cent, and in the family of four it is 3.2 per cent. The unattached individuals are the poorest in our society.
On the reverse side, if you look at the four-person family, 42.4 per cent have an income of $50,000 and over, compared to 3.8 per cent of those unattached individuals. The average personal income on P.E.I. is 79.1 per cent of the Canadian average.
There is increased unemployment. The average unemployment rate has been growing steadily with each passing decade. Workers are experiencing longer periods of unemployment. Unemployment is especially high in rural areas, among the youth, older workers, and those with less formal education.
How will it affect our economy? We will have a smaller tax base. The working-age population contributes the bulk of the tax dollar. As ever-greater numbers of people retire, the tax base from which government draws revenue will be diminished.
There will be a reduced demand for consumer goods. The demand for food, clothing, housing, furniture, school, and recreation facilities is greater among the younger population. This overall demand for consumer goods is not expected to return to the levels experienced in the 1960s and 1970s, and our economy will rely more heavily on selling to export markets.
While industries that cater to young families may suffer as the population ages, new industries aimed at catering to the needs of an older population will flourish.
Population aging will dramatically reduce the size of the workforce, and there is much concern that this will reduce the productivity capacity of our region.
Population aging will result in an older workforce. While older workers are valued for their experience, reliability, and maturity, younger workers are valued for their recent training and job skills, their high energy, and their mobility. The end result will be a smaller, older workforce. This trend will lead to considerable pressure to keep older workers in the workforce, reversing the recent trend of early retirement.
In conclusion, what does it all mean? Demographic and economic trends are not unrelated. Population aging will be a challenge for economic prosperity and, at the same time, our fragile economy will challenge our ability to support an aging population. While improving economic growth is essential for supporting the upcoming population of seniors, maintaining a healthy, active, and engaged older population is central to a prosperous economy. Healthy, active seniors participate in the workforce. They contribute to their communities as volunteers, and they reduce the need for treatment and institutional care.
For many seniors, they can only be active and contributing if they have alternative transportation. For some seniors, cars are out of the question because of the increasing cost of owing a vehicle or no longer wanting to cope with the increasing traffic. If our future prosperity depends on healthy, active seniors contributing to society, the time to start planning is now. One of the most positive aspects of a population aging is that it is fairly predictable. We can project many future services and resource needs based on what we already know about the population and about seniors.
We know one of the priorities for planning for an aging population is exploring alternatives for public transportation in rural areas. Planning is most important for small towns and rural communities, which are aging more rapidly. These are areas where services and public transportation are already in short supply.
Ms Connie Auld, Treasurer and President, Seniors Active Living Centre: This is the first time I have had an opportunity to make a presentation, so I was not quite sure what to expect. I am overawed by all the microphones and everything, but thank you for allowing me to speak.
Senator Forrestall: Madam, it is the other way around.
Ms Auld: My focus is on intercity transportation and off-island transportation. Intercity transportation on P.E.I. is practically non-existent. The Island Transit bus between Charlottetown and Tignish is no longer running. There was a shuttle between Charlottetown and Cornwall, but that fell through because people thought it was too expensive. There is a bus from Montague that runs once a month to Charlottetown.
Senator Forrestall: Who uses it?
Ms Auld: It was difficult to find out anything about it. The only bus service is SMT, Scotia Motor Transit, which picks up passengers on its way to the mainland. One shuttle company has been trying to set up an island transit system, but cannot raise the necessary funds, yet 60 per cent of the calls they receive are from people looking for transportation to other parts of the island. This number increases dramatically during the tourist season.
Just recently the City of Charlottetown hired consultants to come up with a viable form of transportation for the city with a view to possibly extending it at a later date. The results of this research will be announced in March of 2002.
There are also two 15-passenger vans with P.E.I. Enersave which travel from Surrey to Charlottetown and Summerside to Charlottetown, driving people to and from work and stopping at designated points along each route. The cost is $140 a month, and there is a waiting list. However, passengers still have to drive to the pick-up point and make arrangements to leave their cars there.
Islanders still have to rely on using their own cars, taxis, or getting a ride with family or friends if they want to go anywhere on the island or want to connect with one of the off-island transport systems.
As for off-island transportation, since we no longer have the railway, we have to rely on going by air, the SMT bus, or by shuttle, unless we drive ourselves or can afford to go by taxi. The SMT bus leaves Charlottetown daily at 14:20 hours, travelling via Hunter River, Kensington, Summerside, Bordon, and arriving in Moncton, New Brunswick at 17:20. If you want to continue on to Halifax, there is not a connecting bus until 20:30, which translates into a three- hour wait and a very late arrival; namely, at 23:55, which is almost midnight.
Fridays through Sunday, the bus leaves Charlottetown at 08:00 and arrives in Moncton at 10:45 with better connections to Halifax, so one either arrives at 14:40 express or 18:15.
There is also a rail service from Moncton to Halifax, but I have no information on that.
Although one can continue on from Moncton to other cities by bus, I have chosen Halifax as an example because many people go there for various reasons. It is quite evident that it is not possible to return the same day, given the poor connections and the length of time it takes to get there. It is not surprising that the use of the bus service has declined by 20 per cent or more over the past two years.
Furthermore, the bus terminals are in need of improvement to meet the needs of passengers, especially in Charlottetown, but also in Moncton and Halifax.
An alternative to the bus is the shuttle service, which I personally find to be an excellent service. There are presently four privately owned shuttle services in operation commuting between Charlottetown and Halifax. A van shuttle has two vans, one for 18 and the other for 14 passengers respectively. Square One Shuttle has two shuttles going to Halifax and one shuttle to Moncton, New Brunswick. This company is also thinking of extending its service to Saint John, New Brunswick. They provide a door-to-door service on the island, that is, they pick you up and drop you off on the return trip, if you live within the city. When arriving in Halifax or Moncton, they will get you as close to your destination as possible, again, within city limits.
A big advantage is being able to get to either city and return the same day. For example, the shuttle leaves Charlottetown at 08:00 and arrives in Halifax at 12:00. It departs Halifax at 16:30 and arrives in Charlottetown at 20:30. For anyone going to meetings, shopping, for appointments or treatments, this is ideal.
There is also the P.E.I. Express Shuttle, which originates in Dartmouth, and the N.S.-P.E.I. Gold Van shuttle, both operating between Halifax and Charlottetown. Mini vans carrying less than seven passengers do not need to be licensed, so anyone who wants to set up business can do so. Those vans are used mainly during the tourist season.
The shuttle service has grown over the last four years due to the demand. Square One, for instance, handles an average of 500 passengers of all ages each month. Their drivers are friendly and very obliging. They take great care of seniors, and also young people, making sure there is someone there to meet them. The service is convenient, it arrives at the destination point in good time, and the cost is less than the bus service. They would like to increase the number of vans, but it is difficult for them to get additional licences from the Public Utilities Board of Nova Scotia and New Brunswick.
I did not mention George Brookins, Trius Tours, because that service is more of a charter service, it is not a regularly scheduled service.
The shuttle service provides a much-needed service for off-island intercity travel, and there is certainly a place for a similar service on the island. The down side is that, being privately owned, such a service depends on the owners as to how well it is run. The operators themselves feel that there should be some form of regulation in place, especially regarding the mini vans, to ensure passenger safety and satisfaction. Anything untoward that happens reflects on them all.
In conclusion, there is a desperate need for transportation within our province. There needs to be incentives to create innovative transportation options for the citizens of our island. During the summer, there is also a large influx of visitors who arrive at our airport to discover there is no public transportation available. Many of them do not drive, and they find themselves stranded.
Mr. Ron Irving, President, Seniors' College of Prince Edward Island: I am a former artistic director of Theatre P.E.I., and I teach theatre at the University of Prince Edward Island.
As Dr. Bryanton said when we discussed our contribution to your inquiry today, we decided to divide our presentations so that each of us would concentrate on one aspect of the topic. All three of us have been involved in the local, that is the Greater Charlottetown, examination of an urban transit system which is currently under review. However, that is another topic.
Since the background material provided suggested an interest in what deregulation meant to intercity busing, and with P.E.I. as one of the two deregulated provinces, I did inquire of the responsible official in the Department of Transportation and Public Works what he perceived to be the impact of deregulation. Mr. Wilf MacDonald of that department believes that P.E.I. is too small to be of any particular significance in terms of measuring the impact of deregulation. By way of background, he explained that deregulation was introduced in 1994 when the Motor Carrier Act was rescinded. The Motor Carrier Act was economic in focus. Licences were issued under the provisions of the act, and interventions could be made to the regulatory or licensing board challenging the economic viability of a given proposal. There was very little activity with regards to this act. In other words, this was not a busy market.
In 1988, the National Safety Code was introduced and adopted by all the provinces. Mr. MacDonald said that it was anticipated that the economically based regulatory policies would be rescinded in four or five jurisdictions. This did occur in P.E.I. and Newfoundland. He believes that the negative results of deregulation in the United States, for example, increased accident rates due to a lack of standards for equipment, limiting driver hours, et cetera, and may have influenced the decisions regarding deregulation in many provinces. Mr. MacDonald believes that our National Safety Code adequately covers such concerns.
As noted by Mrs. Auld, van shuttle services are becoming increasingly popular on the island, but attempts by their operators to expand their services on the mainland are meeting with some resistance from the major bus company. This is, of course, where regulation in either New Brunswick or Nova Scotia comes into play. Unquestionably, the shuttles have become effective competitors. One hopes that the result may prove to be improved bus service. Incidentally, there is one charter bus, and Connie just referred to that. We met Mr. Brookins in the hall, so we know that you are familiar with the Trius company. Mr. MacDonald mentioned that they are exempted from reporting at highway scales.
One aspect of your study is of particular interest to me, and that is the environmental aspect. I speak solely as a concerned Canadian. My interest in transportation issues grew out of my experience as a participant in the National Forum on Climate Change sponsored by the National Round Table on the Environment and the Economy in 1998. That initiative was concerned with raising public awareness of the climate change issue and bringing a citizen's viewpoint to the debate. Some may be familiar with the declaration that was the product of those sessions.
Among the many impressions left with me was the recognition of the difficulty in achieving consensus from the different levels of government and the realization that the major achievements in addressing the problem are being made at the municipal level. This is not only true of our country but also of other parts of the world. The consensus difficulty was brought home once again this past weekend with reports from the Moscow trade meetings of the objections by provincial premiers, with the exception of Quebec, to the federal government's commitment to meeting the targets of the Kyoto Protocol. I now have to amend that because I picked up the National Post when I checked in a little while ago and you will see the premiers' unity against Kyoto was crumbling. In other words, Mr. Kline was not, indeed, speaking for the premiers, one of them being our own from Prince Edward Island who is pictured here. Nevertheless, the point is well taken that there is difficulty in achieving consensus on many issues.
Also, on the weekend in my Saturday Globe and Mail was an insert from the government of Canada entitled ``Think Climate Change,'' and you probably all saw it. A section on the back page headed ``Ten Ways to Reduce Greenhouse Gas Emissions'' has this item as No. 7. The item states: ``Leave the car at home. Walk or bike on short trips. For longer trips, take the bus. One busload of passengers takes 40 vehicles off the road, saving 70,000 litres of fuel, 175 tonnes of carbon dioxide emissions and 9 tonnes of pollutants per year.''
That is making an important point.
This relates to the question in your background paper that asks ``Is there any way in which the environmental advantages of buses could be exploited to a greater extent?'' Of course, the answer is yes, and I believe it is worthy of the effort and the investment. We need to let Canadians know that we are engaged in a battle to limit greenhouse gases and that we are all involved. Reducing the use of automobiles by substituting bus travel, both locally and on long hauls, is one of the things we can do.
The advertising gurus can do much to change our image of bus travel. We never see bus travel advertised in this part of the country. I can remember those magazine ads of years ago with the smiling Greyhound driver inviting us to leave the driving to him. Now there was a face you could trust. Travel today is in need of an image makeover. Incentive programs to encourage the upgrading of vehicles, terminals, and service are worth exploring, as are incentives for the travelling public.
Those of us who share environmental concerns believe that greater utilization of buses will benefit our future on this planet. I hope that your study will find ways to bring this aspect of bus transport to the level of consideration I believe it deserves. On behalf of my grandchildren, I thank you for listening.
Senator Forrestall: How do you get those cars out of the hands of my grandchildren?
Ms Joan Lay, President, Canadian Pensioners Concerned, Nova Scotia: Honourable senators, Canadian Pensioners Concerned, Nova Scotia is pleased to make this presentation on behalf of Nova Scotian seniors.
Unfortunately, we did not have a great deal of time to prepare and were unable to organize a report of our members' recommendations. However, we have contacted various bodies for their input, mainly the bus companies and the government, and I was talking to them on Friday at five o'clock.
The issue of intercity busing has been studied by both federal and provincial bodies and, as late as 2001, modifications to the Motor Vehicle Act of 1954 were implemented. It has been obvious in the past there has been considerable input from the government sector and the private bus sector, as well as advocacy groups, such as Transport 2000, the Federation of Canadian Municipalities, the Alberta Urban Municipal Association, and the B.C. Old Age Pensioners Organization. This Senate committee is requesting further input from other groups.
We will endeavour to use the guideline questions to make up the framework of our presentation. To us it would seem that deregulation is at the heart of this issue, and our comment would be that, if the results of deregulation in other industries are anything to go by, then we would advise the people of Canada to be very wary of imposing it on intercity bus transport.
Further, that change has been the style of past years and continuing change is imminent, especially in the environmental field, which is specifically affected by transportation of all forms.
The remedy to reverse the decline of bus usage may be in areas other than lower fares, for example, the use of other forms of fuel as they become available, the fact that environmental factors may force a change in the transportation pattern, less use of private vehicular transport, and the fact that bus companies will be expected to be part of the solution and go along with the changes. If you have ever been behind a bus lately, it does not do to be drawing those fumes into your car, unless you have an oxygen mask.
In today's changing world, regulation will be necessary to provide a solid base to work from, and depending on the economy, subsidization of certain areas may be necessary. I was trying to figure out what cross-subsidization meant when a chap in government explained it to me. I do not know whether that would continue to work or not.
Competition has not necessarily been the answer. Fares may be lowered but so may standards, and that is not acceptable. I have nothing against competition, but in Nova Scotia the standards have not increased as a result of competition.
Concentration of ownership leads to feuds between the large companies, which may benefit consumers in the short term, but generally it leads to higher prices in the long term. One part of the population that benefits is the shareholders in these companies, but the travelling public does not, as a whole, see any benefits in fares, scheduling, health, and safety procedures. I am sure you have seen it in the retail businesses, at least we have in Halifax. We have Wal-Mart, we have Zellers, we have Superstore, we have Sobeys, and they are all fighting for their share of the market. It has not, to my knowledge, benefited the prices or the consumers. They all seem to manage to keep prices up while attempting to get more consumers, which does not make too much sense to me but, if you read the paper, you will see that that is what is happening. I believe that the same thing would happen with the bus companies if Greyhound or some of the other Ontario companies came in here. Whether we would benefit from that as consumers is questionable.
The issues of rural, remote bus services and the environmental advantages of buses being exploited, lead us back to the issue of environment and the Canada Action 2000 document which was put before Canadians last weekend. It was my hope that the federal government, if they had put it in our papers as an insert, had distributed it across Canada and that that meant the government was viewing global warming as a change they must take action on at once. All Canadians, including bus companies, must be part of the action, therefore it is necessary for the Senate committee to view future plans from this perspective. It may be the number one priority. The fact that buses provide less pollution by carrying numbers of people is certainly a positive. However, their fuel pollution is questionable.
The importance of safety procedures, maintenance procedures, and service to small communities is covered by regulations, and that must be kept in place. In other words, the intercity buses in Nova Scotia must make stops at key points. Although there may be a saving using unregulated sources of transportation which carry a smaller number of passengers, I believe that is a dangerous practice. I am referring to the two van accidents we had in Nova Scotia. They were disastrous. Seniors were involved. There is no requirement for licensing of these smaller vans. However, the government tells me that, within two months, they will be licensing these vehicles and that they will be inspected. They will have to reach certain maintenance standards. That has been of great concern to us, because we need to keep seniors out of the health system and not create health problems as a result of not maintaining control of standards. In Nova Scotia there appear to be more and more accidents involving large vehicles. Fortunately, not too many buses have, as yet, been involved in accidents. I am hoping that is because of the safety regulations and the maintenance of those buses. Safety code provisions should be reviewed and upgraded on a regular basis, that is, at least every one or two years.
Due to a lack of research, we are unable to comment on some questions. However, it does not appear that bus travel has been adversely affected by the tragedy of September 11. It appears that people are still taking buses. Of course, you do not fall too far from a bus.
In closing, we would like to say that, in rural areas, many of the problems seem to be related to getting to the central point of departure of the intercity buses. This is not their problem, but it certainly affects a number of lower-income people who would use the bus if they could get to it. People in Guysborough County are probably 40 miles away from where the bus stops in Antigonish. Many of these people have great difficulty getting to the central point of departure. That applies to rural communities all over Nova Scotia which are not well serviced by buses. We cannot expect the buses to tour all around the back roads to pick up people. It is a problem for the government and for our seniors.
In answer to your questions about school buses being a business component, it is readily known that the business bringing in revenues receives the most attention. Therefore, on behalf of the travelling public and the country, it is necessary for this committee to recommend positive busing measures in keeping with the times.
The Chairman: One of the concerns of this committee is, of course, the mobility of senior citizens and the availability of transportation services. Do you find that intercity scheduled bus services in your area are sufficient or satisfactory for senior citizens? Do charter and private companies, in general, offer better services to senior citizens?
Ms Auld: That is very definitely so. The bus service, as it runs now, is inadequate for the many seniors and others who have to travel to either Moncton or Halifax for medical treatment. They like to come back that same day after their doctors' appointment. It is impossible for them to take the regular bus service. Therefore, the shuttles offer an excellent service. They also drop the people right off at the hospital and pick them up there, so that is a bonus. They are trying hard to fill that niche, because it is necessary.
I recently heard that patients are now being referred to Moncton because too many were being sent to Halifax. They are thinking of expanding the shuttle service to Moncton and Saint John in order to get people over there for medical treatments.
That is not the only use of the shuttle. Many students go back and forth, and people use the shuttle to go to the airports. It is very convenient.
The Chairman: If senior citizens have to choose between driving their cars and using the bus services, what would they choose?
Ms Auld: In many cases, seniors no longer drive. Seniors going over for a treatment or for a short time prefer to take the shuttle rather than drive themselves. If they drove, they would have to find parking and, in actual fact, it is cheaper for them to take the shuttle than to take their own cars.
Ms Bryanton: We still have to deal with our major problem, which is that it is easier to leave our province than it is to get around within our province. We have a very high percentage of seniors in our province. We have a high percentage of people with low incomes. They cannot afford a car. Some do not want to own a car because they have environmental concerns. You ask, ``Would a senior choose a car or a bus?'' The fact is that they do not have a choice. They cannot get from one point to another without depending on friends, neighbours, or paying for taxis, and that tends to be very costly. Seniors just do not have a choice.
The Chairman: We cannot agree more than to say that there is talent in knowledge within the senior population. Are you given an opportunity to promote change in the transportation sector in your province?
Ms Bryanton: We try.
The Chairman: Are you heard?
Mr. Irving: We are heard; we are not sure we are listened to.
Ms Bryanton: We have been involved in every meeting about transportation. We have met with members of the government who were looking at transportation across the province. We have also met with the City of Charlottetown about transportation within the city. The province was looking at the question of transportation, but in terms of public transportation, but in terms of how they could synchronize the lights so that cars would not have to stop so often. They did say, however, that they were also considering the issue of public transportation for the province as a whole. We recently received a communication from them stating that, since the City of Charlottetown was considering the matter, they were not doing that. The City of Charlottetown was not looking at the provincial need for public transportation.
It is a very difficult situation. It is very difficult to get people to look at public transportation as one other form of infrastructure that we need in our communities. I think the issue of public transportation is just as important as the building of a new highway. I do not know why it is so difficult to consider public transportation as a service to the citizens.
Ms Lay: As you may know, Halifax is the fastest growing city in Canada. One reason for that is that all of our seniors are leaving the rural areas and moving into Halifax, and they are doing that because of the lack of transportation. They cannot keep their appointments without staying overnight.
The Chairman: Do they feel more secure living in the big city?
Ms Lay: No. It is a transportation issue.
Ms Bryanton: We are even losing people from P.E.I. to Halifax because there is no transportation for seniors.
Senator Forrestall: Are you referring to people who have to see specialists?
Ms Bryanton: It is important to have adequate transportation just for daily living. We are losing people on P.E.I. because we do not have public transportation. For example, if one member of a couple dies, the other does not want to be stranded. Some of these people may never have learned how to drive a car. They leave the province because there is no public transportation.
Senator Oliver: Joan, do you have statistics to back up what you just said?
Ms Lay: I can probably get that for you, senator.
The Chairman: I will ask the clerk to contact you and we will distribute the statistics to our committee members.
What is the best way to ensure that bus fares to small communities remain affordable?
Ms Bryanton: Ours is a very small province, but we are also the most densely populated province in Canada. Since we have a small population, we must look at some innovative ways to provide public transportation.
My own mother went astray and moved to Ontario.
Senator Forrestall: God forbid.
Ms Bryanton: When I visit her, I fly into Toronto and the Owen Sound Courier Services picks me up at the airport and drops me off in Medford, Ontario, where my mother lives. That is a very innovative mode of transportation. They were transporting parcels, but also they had room to carry passengers, so they make some extra money doing that. I think it is a really good alternative and it provides people with an opportunity to go back and forth. I have also taken the regular bus system. That is a long, tedious drive. We have couriers in our province, so this is one transportation alternative we could consider. If someone wanted to provide public transportation, then perhaps they could also provide a courier service to add to their revenue.
Ms Lay: If the bus companies in Nova Scotia looked at the total picture, they could also provide a service, a Van service as well as a bus service. We need more van service, as long as the government provides the legislation to maintain those vans and make sure that safety procedures are followed. We need it as badly as P.E.I. does, because our province is slightly larger with just as many rural areas. That is a major problem.
Senator Oliver: School buses used to drive children to school are parked until school is over and then they are used to pick up the children and take them home. In the evenings, the mid-mornings and in the afternoons, those buses, for the most, part are not being used. One of the questions we asked yesterday in Montreal was: whether there was any possible use that those school buses, which are used in rural areas, could be put to help transport the disabled and seniors who do not have vehicles. Is it that they are uncomfortable?
Ms Bryanton: They are horrible.
Ms Auld: They are very difficult to get in and out of too. It would be impossible for anybody who is handicapped.
Ms Bryanton: We need to look at transportation for our total population. People need to get to work; they need to get home. School buses are not available at the times that they would be going back and forth to work. They are one of the most uncomfortable vehicles.
Senator Oliver: They do not have safety belts either.
We keep hearing about the shuttle buses in P.E.I. How many passengers can a shuttle bus accommodate?
Ms Auld: It is a 14- or an 18-passenger bus.
Senator Oliver: It is a standard bus?
Ms Auld: Yes.
Ms Bryanton: They are vans, not buses.
Senator Oliver: Are the seats comfortable?
Ms Auld: Yes.
Ms Bryanton: They also have seat belts.
Senator Oliver: Are the seats two by two?
Ms Auld: No, you could sit three in a row. They are not individual seats. In most cases, they only take 11 passengers, two per seat and then one in the front.
Senator Oliver: Is there a bathroom on the van?
Ms Auld: No, but they will stop whenever necessary. That is another plus as far as the passengers are concerned. The standard buses only stop at the scheduled stops. There is a washroom on the bus, but it is extremely difficult for a senior or a disabled person to use that washroom whilst the bus is in motion. It is not feasible. In fact, it is dangerous.
Senator Oliver: I take it there are no video, TV, sound system or computer facilities.
Ms Auld: No, and that is because the trip is short. It takes four hours to get from the island to Halifax. However, to get to Halifax by bus, you have to go to Moncton first and then from Moncton to Halifax. If you go by shuttle, you go direct, so it takes much less time. It takes four hours, depending on the weather. There is usually at least one stop, if not two. If more stops are required for the comfort of passengers, they will stop.
Senator Oliver: Some of our previous witnesses told us that it was impractical to have a 57-seat, modern bus going into the small areas like Parrsboro and Inverness. They say those areas should be serviced by six- or nine-seater vans which would take people to the main route where the main bus would pick them up. Would that kind of system work in P.E.I.?
Ms Bryanton: Yes. They would have to be small vans because we do not have a large population.
Senator Oliver: What about six-seaters?
Ms Bryanton: Not quite that small. Perhaps a nine-seater would be appropriate. I will give you another example of a transportation system. I visit my son who lives in the Caribbean.
Senator Oliver: You probably visit in January and February.
Ms Bryanton: They use 12-seater vans as buses and taxis. If necessary, they can accommodate 16 over short distances. They work quite well. The taxis and the buses look alike. One day I was waving down what I thought was the bus, but it was a taxi, so I shared it with a lady. It was beneficial in that I got to where I was going, and I gave her what would have been the bus fare towards the price of the cab fare.
Mr. Irving: Shuttles are the new kid on the block. They have been running for only four years and they have built up a successful business. I think it is reasonable to expect that that business will increase. With competition, you will probably see the amenities that you are talked about such as laptop hook-ups being available. When more is offered to the travelling public, it will bring more business their way.
Ms Bryanton: P.E.I. is also at a disadvantage in that we have a very costly air service. I have to return tomorrow, but I could not bring myself to pay the cost of a return plane ticket.
Senator Oliver: How much is it to fly Charlottetown-Halifax return?
Ms Bryanton: It is usually in the $500 range.
Senator Oliver: It is a 20-minute flight.
Ms Bryanton: Yes. It is a disgrace. We do not get the type of service we need. If we cannot afford that, then we need some other type of transportation such as a regularly scheduled service that would allow us to get around and to get off the island.
Senator Callbeck: Thank you all for your presentations. It is obvious you have put a lot of thought into these. You have given us a lot of interesting statistics, which certainly point to the fact that there will be a lot of changes down the road. You said that it is easier to get on and off the island than it is to get around the island, and I agree with you. We have to think of innovative ways to transport people. You have already mentioned some. Do you have any others that you would like to get on the record?
Ms Bryanton: When anybody talks about public transportation in P.E.I., they usually say that it will not work on P.E.I. because people are married to their cars. People would not be married to their vehicles if they had an alternative means of transportation. I live in the country. When I go into work, I would dearly love to leave my car at North River Corner and catch a bus. However, that opportunity is not available to me.
To come here for today, we decided we would all travel together. Ron was our pilot. I left my car in North River. I almost had to beg to be allowed to leave my car at a service station overnight. There are blocks or barriers all over the place.
There must be some strong public debate about public transportation, and we must approach that with a positive attitude. Our province is small and our population is not terribly dense. How can we ensure that a person living in Tignish can come down to Summerside or Charlottetown?
Car insurance is going up to the extent that seniors can no longer afford to insure their vehicles. They are giving up their cars. We are isolating our seniors. They are becoming ill because they cannot get out and do things. We must encourage communities, perhaps by providing incentives to them, to provide a transportation service. Whether the community or a person within the community provides that, it should be recognized as a needed service and be subsidized. It should not, of course, be too expensive a service.
Senator Callbeck: Have very many seniors given up their cars because of increased insurance costs?
Ms Bryanton: They are beginning to do that, yes. They have to deal with increased insurance and gas costs. Seniors live on a fixed income, but the cost of living continues to go up and up. Every time there is an increase, although it may just be a dollar or a few cents, when you add it all up and you are trying to live on a fixed income, you find that you cannot afford a vehicle. If you cannot afford a vehicle, you certainly cannot afford a taxi. They are beginning to be jeopardized.
Senator Callbeck: Of course, investment interest is lower today than some seniors expected it would be in their retirement.
Ms Bryanton: No, when people made their retirement decisions, they were expecting a certain amount of income from investments, and that is not happening.
Senator Callbeck: Colleen, in your first paragraph you say that the shuttle service between Charlottetown and Cornwall fell through because it was too expensive. How much was it?
Ms Auld: It was $15 return for a very short distance.
Mr. Irving: This is a bedroom community on the outskirts of Charlottetown.
Ms Bryanton: Can you imagine someone paying $15 to go to and from work?
Senator Callbeck: You also say in your brief that it is not surprising that the use of the bus service has declined by 20 per cent or more over the past two years. Where did you get those figures? The reason I ask is that we heard some witnesses say that the bus service has declined and others said that it had not, that it had, in fact, increased.
Mr. Irving: We read that in your documents.
Ms Auld: I got that information from the shuttle service because I found it was almost impossible to get anything from the bus service. They have a 1-800 number, but it is very difficult to get any information from them. The shuttles are gauging that assessment from the communication that they have had with the bus service and from the fact that the number of people that they are transporting on a daily basis has increased so much. I know, from having travelled from Charlottetown to Moncton on the bus in the past, that you usually had a seat to yourself. The bus was never full except at Christmas time when students would be travelling. That was before we had a shuttle service.
Senator Callbeck: Do you believe that these vans, whether they are carrying one or 16 passengers, should be inspected?
Ms Auld: Yes, very definitely.
Senator Callbeck: Ron, I am interested in the promotion and advertising in the bus industry. I find it strange that there is not more promotion of the bus industry. As you say, we all remember some of the ads that we used to see.
Mr. Irving: Yes, and I think that there is an image that bus travel is something that is only done by blue-collar workers, students or seniors. It has lead to a lack of concern for the passenger. They do not sell their service by making facilities attractive or upgrading their equipment. It is important to do that and I think there should be incentives to both the traveller and the bus companies.
Senator Callbeck: What incentives do you think should be offered to the travelling public?
Mr. Irving: Attractive rates is one incentive. A number of promotional ideas could be used such as one passenger per trip being reimbursed his fare. That sort of thing is done in industry and business if they want to promote something. The advertising geniuses can give us ideas about how to do that.
The bottom line is that it has to be a pleasant experience, a more pleasant experience, than it is now to travel on those buses.
Ms Bryanton: Customer service would be really nice. The shuttles provide incentive now. On some of them, every eighth trip is free, and on others it is every tenth trip.
Senator Callbeck: I wanted to know if you had ideas other than reduced fares.
Mr. Irving: I think we have to alter the image of bus travel so that more people would be attracted to that service.
Senator Oliver, the shuttles come to Halifax for $45 and the bridge fee alone is $37.50, so you can see that it makes economic sense to leave your car at home.
Senator Oliver: The shuttle company pays the bridge fee.
Mr. Irving: Yes.
Senator Oliver: What if they threw in a sandwich?
Mr. Irving: That would be another incentive.
Senator Callbeck: There has been some discussion about transporting people in rural areas to a central point to be picked up. I am sure that is a problem all across Canada, not only in Prince Edward Island and Nova Scotia.
Ms Lay: Yes, it is. If the bus companies wanted to get people to a central point, they could provide pick-up service. Everybody in the interior of Guysborough County has to come out to the main highway at Antigonish to be picked up. A pick-up service might be one of the solutions.
Senator Jaffer: I come from British Columbia, but I have a good understanding of your problems because my son went to piping school in Summerside and he suddenly found himself without any kind of transportation.
Senator Oliver: She bought him a car.
Senator Jaffer: I was shocked when he told me he could not get around. He had to walk.
My question is about people who need wheelchair access. How do they manage on shuttles? Are there specially adapted shuttles?
Ms Bryanton: We do have transportation for people in wheelchairs but, again, it is quite costly. That transportation has to be booked ahead. It is not terribly convenient. When we get our transportation system in Prince Edward Island, a certain number of the vehicles will have to be wheelchair accessible. That can be done.
Senator Jaffer: We have what we call the ``Handy Dart Bus'' in British Columbia. Are there special shuttles in Halifax or P.E.I.?
Ms Bryanton: No. We have what is called ``Donna's Transport'' or ``Pat and the Elephant.'' Those are specifically for wheelchair transportation. Regular passengers do not go on them.
Senator Forrestall: Perhaps Senator Callbeck, knowing Baddeck could tell us what kind of service you have into Summerside or into Charlottetown?
Senator Callbeck: We do not have any.
Senator Forrestall: What about the area near Overton? What is up there?
Senator Callbeck: Nothing.
Senator Oliver: Can you take the train?
Senator Callbeck: You can walk the track.
Senator Forrestall: Did you ever consider other alternatives? Did any come to mind?
Senator Callbeck: Other alternatives have been considered, but it is a matter of dollars. It is a service that is needed.
Ms Bryanton: When we looked at bus situations in the past, we always envisioned a 40-seater bus. That is just not appropriate. We are beginning to consider more viable options and more innovative ways of providing transportation so that someone could leave Baddeck and be in Summerside in no time flat.
Mr. Irving: There are precedents. The oil crisis of the 1970s saw a great many innovative plans, including the use of vans in the province to transport people. The thrust then was to do away with as much automobile traffic as possible and the political will was there to do it. It can be done.
Senator Oliver: Most of the major carriers today have the big 47- and 52-seater buses, but they also have mini-vans and school buses. Most of the big carriers today are quite diversified and are able to meet rural demands.
Mr. Irving: Not in our province.
Ms Bryanton: Companies like Trius could consider providing a certain type of service because they have a variety of sizes of vehicles. Their major thrust is towards chartering and touring. However, they have other vehicles, and they could provide a certain type of service. They cannot do it all, but they could be one player in providing public transportation.
Senator Forrestall: Having used the alternate form of transportation, the school bus was an enlightening experience. We sat in kindergarten-school-sized seats, which were most uncomfortable.
The Chairman: We did not go to P.E.I. Fortunately but witnesses from P.E.I. came to us. Thank you for your presentations.
The committee adjourned.