• Do you support the removal…

• Do you support the removal of market entry controls of the intercity bus industry? Why or why not?

Yes I very strongly support the removal of such controls. The market, not bureaucrats, should decide what services to offer to which customers. This is how it is done around the world, even in developing countries and China.

• What are the benefits of removing market entry controls? What are the drawbacks?

The long term benefits are better bus service, and a greater variety of options for passengers. In Good bus service should reduce congestion and greenhouse gas emissions.

The drawbacks is that some will lose jobs. In the short term, the players in the industry today will fight to protect their interests. But that is a better than the status quo in which the travelling public has poor service. There will be some poor operators that will provide bad service, especially early on, but that is normal in every industry and eventually they will either get better or go out of business.

• A system needs to be in place to ensure that all vehicles, including those carrying less than 10 passengers, are safe and properly insured when being used to transport people between municipalities for a fee. What do you think the minimum safety and insurance requirements should be for these vehicles?

Vehicle should have seatbelts, good breaks, not be rusted out, and be up-to-date on routine maintenance. Insurance should include some liability for passengers who are injured in collisions.

However if you make safety and insurance requirements unreasonably stringent you will keep many potential bus passenger service providers out of the market.

• How much of your business is currently attributed to non-urgent medical transfer (patients, supplies, etc.)?

None.

• Could municipalities and social and health organizations better partner with transportation providers to serve the public? If so, how?

No. That will just make life more difficult for the service providers and increase their costs. It will also cause rent-seeking behaviour by some providers who are better able to “partner” with municipalities and health organizations, thus keeping their competitors out. Any such “partnership” will have a transaction cost: applications, permits, fees etc. which will just increase the cost of doing business. And a service provider would have to do it for every municipality and health organization where they want to operate.

It’s better for providers to compete in the open market without interference from government. Government “help” for a business is usually an impediment to the company being helped, or at least to that company’s competitors.

• Are there any innovative services or policies currently in operation in Ontario or in other jurisdictions that you think provide a good model for how transportation networks can develop in the future?

Yes the UBER model. Also, school busses. These are private companies that move millions of children safely every day around the province. There are airport shuttle services here and there around the province. I have used these to get better service than regular intercity busses. Then I just catch a cab from the airport to my final destination. They are much faster than the milk-run intercity busses.

• Is there any other feedback you would like to provide on the issues and/or proposal outlined in this discussion paper?

What does “intercity” mean? Is Mississauga to Oakville travel “intercity? It should be considered that as intercity. That will stimulate more transportation options within large urban areas such as the GTA, where to take a bus from say Oakville to Toronto requires you to disembark at every municipal border.

[Original Comment ID: 194531]