So Vancouverites thought they could handle the multi-headed snc lavalin: one of the worlds largest engineering conglomerates (major powergeneration, major refinery, check out their website for more...)-maybe they know how to play the game better than us locals...The homegrown cope gang got whopped in their own back yard. Vancouver may be a nuclear free zone, but we are now shaking hands with a devil.

jason, you are certainly correct in your decription of this beast called SNC-Lavalin. But as sneaky and greedy as this outfit may well be, the blame for this coverup has to be placed where it belongs, on the bureaucrats and the politicians who employ them. Let's get real here. Someone knew before the contract was signed that it didn't meet the assurances provided to the public. Did someone lie or did the blinkers get in the way when the red flags started fluttering? I'd suggest you begin the search for a culprit with the chair of the GVRD's transportation committee. Given that this unpopular project was only kept alive because Gordon Campbell's Liberal government would not take no for an answer, he and his cabinet also deserve to wear much of the blame. It's beginning to look like the lack of snow for the 2010 Olympics may be the least of the problems for BC taxpayers. I can hardly wait to see what other suprises are hidden away in other P-3 Olympic contracts goodies this outfit has secretly handed it.

The public is simply another problem that needs to be handled when it comes to any mega project. BE it a major development in paradise or this RAV project. Your voice no longer counts. I still feel it would be cheaper to fill the streets with smart cars for users to pop in and use anywhere, anytime, then to build this transit line.

The Liberals will never win with you whiners. Since when do you guys care about taxpayers money? Or effecting Businesses for that matter. Every post ever made in The Tyee shows complete disregard for business and taxpayers money, yet just because it’s not a completely public sector job now you all have to come out whining to defend your ideology. This is what’s the worst about the NDP, blinded ideology leads to nothing getting done. We have some of the worst infrastructure in North America yet when a government tries to do something they are met with nothing but opposition. Start looking to the future and take off your ideological blinders. You grand kids and there grand kids will be thanking you for these long term decisions made today. It is going to have to be done someday and guess what, the price is never going to decrease.

Forward-looking, intelligent decisions can certainly be made without secrecy. In fact the best decisions often arise out of a process of openness and full-participation. There are two root justifications for secrecy that I can see here. One, that you hold a worldview in which average people are incapable of making good decisions so deceit is neccessary and justified (e.g. G.Bush and Straussians), or two that you are protecting special interests by keeping an information power imbalance. The BC Liberals have a dose of both. The process that happened with the RAV must continue to be strongly opposed, in favour of participatory & open decision making. Start by voting out the Liberals, and more importantly collecting civic energy at the community and municipal levels.

1. It is precisely because this is public money that the process must be open and "transparent" to use a word that seems to be common. There is a very small step from this type of negotiation to third world cronyism. It is the responsibility for elected officials working through bureaucrats get the best value for the money and fo this reason open tender has historically been used in democratic countries. Yes, BC has terrible infrastructure when compared nationally and direction to improve local transportation particularly public transportation were considered and approved long ago in the livable region plan. P3's have not been a major feature in the development of the superior infrastructure in other parts of Canada and in the few cases where the operation of public infrastructure has been turned over to the private sector, the results have not been favourable to the public as in the case of the Ontario highway. If the process is not transparent, which seeks to preclude influence peddling, and the results are not demostrably significantly better for the taxpayer than an open bid system, which they certainly have not been to date in North America, I think that it is irresponsible for elected politicians such as our provincial government to push for P3's simply o the basis of dogma. 2. Note that it is important to distinguish between P3's, in which control is given to (shared with) the private sector and traditional private sector participation in the construction and operation of public faclities as you would find in the traditional bidding on a project or the bidding for highways maintenance contracts. This control of what is done with our tax money must remain in hands of those we elect (& can throw out) with appropriate control systems in place to keep the entire process honest. 3. ven if the engineer is right & the 30 year payback is better with this method, it is irrevelant to the business operator who may lose his business due to this disruption. It is unethical and unconscionable to proceed without appropriate consultation in advance of a decision. Too long winded!

"Every post ever made in The Tyee shows complete disregard for business and taxpayers money"

your absolutely right, Brent, I just spent the past two hours reviewing every post ever made in The Tyee and can confirm their complete disregard for business and taxpayers money

Give me a break! If Tyee readers never concerned themselves with taxpayers money why was there an outcry about BCRail, to name just one of the travesties of the right being perpetrated upon the the taxpaying public. Hundreds of millions of dollars in revenue were completely thrown away...why don't you just admit that you are a greedy right-wing whore who will say anything to cover up the stench of corruption?

I agree with Brent that we have lousy infrastructure but the discussion is about whether this is the most cost effective, and beneficial way to improve it. I think that The P3 process has not proven itself

1. The Liberals are not Liberals 2. They are more driven by ideology than any party in the history of BC

SNC Lavalin makes bullets for the USA to use in Iraq. OF COURSE they are a big corporation that will screw anybody if they can get away with it. We should have known better.

Nikita Khrushchev was a big proponent of boring rather than cut-and-cover. He was in charge in the construction of the Moscow Metro in the 1930's. In "Khrushchev Remembers", he reminisces about the advantages of boring. That was seventy years ago, hee hee. I think most Torontonians would pay any price to expand our clogged, tiny, and antiquated subway, so don't way too indignant. At least you get rapid transit!

It is too bad that folks can't have an opinion with out the ideologs babbling political pap. It seems that to have an opinion is to invite a label. The RAV problem is/will be a 'Liberal' boondoggle plain and simple. (Neither party has anything to be proud of in their handling of public monies.) The present 'liberal' neo-conservative group running the province could really care less about business or labour. Both parties made promises that they never intended to keep so what else is new? It doesn't make it right but a political fact of life. The personalities involved really do hate each other no matter what they say in public. The Province as a whole suffers because of this. And 'Brent' does a disservice by using his biased political rhetoric in an attempt to side track the discussion by labelling those who post here. It is also obvious that he doesn't give a tinker's dam for the merchants on Cambie. By the way that the infamous 'Debt Clock' never had a chance to record the Mr. Campbell's billions added to the PUBLIC DEBT. I wonder why that is Brent?

Brent, you must be on the wrong page. It's you who is sputtering off defensively against the obvious shortcomings of the P3 concept. Shortcomings like the lack of timely, thorough, open and honest consultation with effected citizens and the near impossibility of knowing what lays hidden in contracts. You know, the ones that have clauses ensuring concessions from the customer on various front, including the ones pertaining to corporate privacy to avoid competitors. A red herring if I ever saw one. When the call for tenders went out, it would have taken about two lines of copy to make it clear the entire process will be open. If companies don't want to be completely open with contracts requiring taxpayers' money, then they need not bid. Let's get real here folks, corporate privacy rights shouldn't trump public rights and any politician who thinks otherwise ought to explain that to voters the next time they are running for office. It's doubtful many contractors will walk away. And Brent, there is nothing more ideologicaly driven than P3s. No one is objecting to a government doing something to improve infrastructure in the Lower Mainland. But why would a government abandon a system that has served us all quite well with open and honest bidding and full contract disclosure and replace it with this present mess we're currently discussing? Interesting that a casino operation out in Richmond obviously gets all kinds of consultation and the right to insist on alterations to IT'S OWN RAV station, while retailers and others along Cambie St. have to get lucky at an environmental assessment hearing to learn what the GVRD should have made clear to them months ago. I am beginning to think this RAV line is going to turn out to be the project from hell for BC taxpayers Brent.

this is not really about the provincial government, this is about a complete disregard for the public by municipal officials. sure, there was money given by the libs, but the cost is divided up by the municipalities, the feds, translink and the province. no extra blame should be allocated to any of these entities. they were all short sighted with this project.

I have lived throughout North America and Vancouver's infrastructure is better than most cities in America. Brent is completely wrong. Clearly he has never travelled outside of Vancouver. Most cities have poor public transit and very crowded freeways, far worse than anything Vancouver has ever seen.

I agree with Burgess. We are witnessing the birth of a Liberal Boondoggle. Think Save-On-Foods Memorial Centre, only bigger.

I'm sure Gordo's boys are quite content that Vancouverites are flustered about the method used to build the RAV rather than the real issue - a P3 deal with SNC-Lavalin, Canada's war profiteer.

SNC-Lavalin has the contract for new construction of the Sea to Sky Highway, they also tried to build a garbage incinerator in Squamish in which they said there would be no "risk" to air quality. With results of environmental studies showing a huge increase in small airborne particulate and the people of Squamish coming together to reject this project it was denied by city officials. It appears that large multi nationals like SNC-Lavalin can lie through their teeth, until they are proven wrong, then they retreat, hey wait a minute! Sounds like BC Liberal policy??? The good news is that the people of Squamish won!

Well, the Liberals did push this pork barrel against the repeated and vigorous opposition of the very people who were supposed to make the decision, and they only operate their scams publically like that when the profits to be made by their chosen recipient of tax millions are potentially huge.

They usually lie much more elaborately and for much longer about this kind of scam. They're either slipping, or they just don't think anybody can stop them no matter what, so they just no longer feel the need to pretend.

Somebody told me this line goes right to that big casino that everybody opposed and the liberals pushed through against all objections. River Rock or something, I think. Is that true?

Just build it already,three months of disruption is a small price to pay in the big picture.Go to any city in this world and its the same same.Vancouver needs rapid transit.

kengineer, of course Vancouver needs rapid transit, but what it doesn't need is an arrogant provincial government that simply steps all over the democratic decision-making process of the GVRD. (oh, hey maybe it was the chair of the GVRD's transit committee who urged to Liberals to intervene after losing his pet project in an honest and open vote.)It certainly doesn't need a RAV line down Cambie, unless of course the aim is to take travellers to where you want them to go, like the River Rock casino, which just happens to be in the hands of a Liberal financial supporter. Vancouver could have solved the problem by recylcing the old Arbutis line, but "the creme de la creme" went sour over that causing some politicians to pee their pants in fear of all that heavy fat dripping on them. The "big picture", you say? The big picture seems to be all about gerrymandering, backroom deals, more lies then the Liberals told in 2001 (a feat in itself), and a publicly funded taxi service for a certain casino. Am I correct in assuming you won't see your business suffer any during that "three months of disruption" kengineer?

well yes it is true, they, our municipal reps to the GVRD, some COPE LITE fellows from Vancouver,( with the exception of Mayor Corrigan from Burnaby and Cadman from Vancouver) kept voting and voting until they got the result they wanted...which was approval of the RAV. We'll be remembering that in the next civic election. But ...It is remarkable that cities such as Paris, London, New York, Budapest, had underground 'tubes' or metro's, some in the late 1800's ....while we, and successive provincial and municipal leaders sat on there duffs, never thinking that the day would come...when we would need underground metros, never contemplating that it would be cheaper, and less disruptive to have built them, when land and other capital/labor costs where cheaper...say in the late '60's or early '70's ....the writing was on the wall, the demographics were predictable. So, now we'll be building the RAV on terms that are less than desireable...when perhaps there are indeed other more pressing transportation infrastructure needs then RAV....and then we have the twinning of the Port Mann bridge, and doubling the lanes on Highway No One...and all sorts of 'tax' give-aways and 'free-riders'...to the motoring public and the corporate transport companies...does anyone wonder about that?

kengineer according to public information it is three months per construction unit of one to two blocks at a time, meaning about two years of disruption on Cambie. (Won't the traffic on Granville and Oak be a real pleasure for the next few years?) What business can survive that? That is a very big price for the Cambie merchants and residents to pay. And that doesn't include the Granville Street section downtown is already a blight on the city. All this disruption to placate a few of the 'Creme de la creme' between 25th and 52nd on the Arbutus Corridor which was a 'natural' for this project. Who else has that kind of political clout that an obvious transit corridor can be turned into a yuppy greenway at taxpayers expense?

Whew... no surprise, really. But good news for me- with the warmer weather due to global warming I'll be cycling more- saving gas $$ and avoiding the construction nightmare, and staying fit fit fit!!

If Gordo can rip up contracts, why can't Vancouver rip this one up?

Now, now, the Arbutus route would have added at least ten minutes to the time required to get downtown. As well, one might well have had to ride a bus at some point. And, to top it all off, all one had to do was buy the rolling stock and put in some stations. How can one possibly expect to make a profit on such a piddling deal? Nothing about the Vancouver transportation has so disheartened me and made me more cynical about the both the federal and provincial gov'ts willingness to screw citizens for the sake of crony-ism as the RAV line. When you see the oligarchy spending an 1.5 billion more than necessary on a system that may well be riderless much of the time (We could have had people NOT ride an Arbutus line for a measly $500m) you start to understand why the French not only tossed the royalty out on their ass but separated a few heads from necks for good measure.

Much as I would love to curdle the creme by putting the Skytrain in their front yards, I have to wonder how much that would have cost, too. Surely CN or whoever would be entitled to a reasonable compensation. Factor in the relative lack of businesses on Arbutus and Cambie is somewhat defensible. Lastly a note about planning for tomorrow: the urban planners of the 60s were also convinced of the necessity of a highway running through Strathcona. They didn't get it cuz of the damn nimbys. But decades later, Vancouver has a liveable downtown core that is the envy of many cities, precisely because of the lack of a freeway.

Maybe I should have a hammer and sickle tattooed on my body somewhere, cuz the way I see it, CN got a great deal on that land (namely, free in exchange for providing a service), profited from it for nearly a hundred years, and if they had any sense of corporate goodwill (stop snickering y'all ;-) a thank you and a tax receipt would have been compensation a-plenty.

Also Ron, to my understanding the greatest need for transit in Vancouver proper is East/West, and putting transit down Arbutus coupled with 99B/98B service along existing arterials like 41st Ave made the most sense to the transportation planners who approached the problem w/out regard to vested interests.

Happy to be enlightened if I'm wrong.

regards. Stump

To clarify... by "transit down Arbutus" I mean some form of light rail down the existing rail corridor.

The Arbutus line is owned by the CPR. Canadian Pacific Railway got a land grant from the good burgers of Vancouver which included the Arbutus line which was later leased to and run by BCElectric and later BCHydro. That is why the little yard engines changed their color from yellow to red. ( If anyone noticed.)

Transit planners basically have 2 options. Go cheap and only those who don't have other options will use it or go deluxe and attract people who would otherwise drive. Personally I believe the right choice is to get people out of their cars and to do this you need to provide high speed and convenient transit. The Arbutus line would not have provide either to anybody who would use transit. The Arbutus line would have been a white elephant.

Richmond centre is a high density population centre, there are a lot of destination locations both along the Cambie corridor, in Richmond and Downtown. The RAV line will be a high ridership line. Anyone who thinks any new line to the East would have anywhere near the ridership isn't thinking straight.

The bottom line is that the RAV line is a good idea. If cut and cover will make a better line for less money then I am for it. I hope that the Cambie Street merchants are well compensated for any business losses, as it only seems fair.

It seems that much of the opposition to RAV is highly political. Not every decision made by the Liberal government is a bad idea (just most of them).

Thanx for the clarification Burgess. I thought it was "CP" but I went with CN as it was cited earlier.

re: arbutus as a white elephant... The Arbutus line swings east after it passes thru Kerrisdale, heading south. By the time you get down to Marine Drive it's only a few blocks from the Arthur Laing Bridge. I'm no transit planner, but it seems one could have easily used that line and had it still reach the centre of Richmond.

re: a new line to the East... all the data and opinion I've seen on the subject suggests the Northeast sector of the Lower Mainland is the high growth area, hence the calls to twin the bridge.

Frankly, the Arbutus line coupled with some tolls for single occupant vehicles on the Oak St. Bridge would have same effect in getting people out of their cars IMO. A little carrot, a little stick....

Stump

The Arbutus line would be a nice scenic line that would connect two densly populated centres. Probably with a big stick you could get reasonable commuter ridership going from Richmond Centre to Downtown. The RAV line is a lot more than this. It will be faster than driving and connect quite a number of destinations along its run.

The Northeast sector is a high growth area, but it is still mostly relatively low density housing (low density housing==low transit usage). It is also already served by the Westcoast express (which was a good idea). That is not to say that more transit is not needed there, it is. However, the potential "cars off the road" is a lot higher with RAV.

Thanks for your posts, James. They bring the discussion back to transportation issues, not political navel gazing. However, I still think that RAVCO needs to be taken to task for how they handled the bidding process. Who knows if SNC-Lavalin's bid was the lowest - there were no other "cut and fill" bids to compare it to. As soon as RAVCO began to consider SNC-Lavalin's proposal the other bidders should have been invited to adjust their bids on the same basis. And by the way, in case anyone thinks that is not fair to SNC-Lavalin, they should have been given the opportunity to re-submit too, knowing that there would now be other contractors bidding using the same construction methods, etc. For RAVCO to accept a different proposal than that which they specified in the tender, without giving everyone else the same opportunity, is a perversion of the bidding process that needs to be addressed.

I really don't care where the line goes as it really will have little impact on my travel habits but what is annoying is the outright lieing that has taken place over this project. Just wait until everyone gets their transit levi on the tax bill this year and wait for the howls to grow in volume. A little history of the Arbutus line. It was to connect the railway along the Fraser River with the Waterfront and the added bonus was the cheap transit cost for commuters from Vancouver's West Side using the trams to get to work downtown, to New Westminster and Steveston. Marpole thrived with its interchange and died as a business hub when the trams stopped running. It was very welcome then by West Side Creme de la Creme but not now. We all know the arguments pro and con re the RAV but the prime concern 'over there' seems to be the use of transit as a conduit for criminals and undesirables. Too bad the politicians can't get their collective heads out of the sand and demand manned stations and turnstyles which almost every other system in the world has. The planning committee for the first Skytrain wanted turnstyles but that meant more employees than the politicians wanted. Thus the cost of lost fares and criminal activity was transferred to the riders, homeowners and businesses. As is typical the politicians avoid responsibility at all costs. Note that the Mayor of Burnaby was turfed from the Translink board for asking all the right questions while THE CHAIR babbles platitutes and political bafflegab when asked to explain serious concerns. He who has the gold rules the trouble is the gold the politicians are using is not theirs and Mr. McCallum seems determined to spend a lot of it on this white elephant.

PPP = Public Private Partneship is better than PSU+NDP which is Public Sector Unions and New Democratic Party. Way better.

The federal government created a report several years ago regarding the RAV line. In summary they found that the project was ill-conceived and likely to end in a taxpayer funded boondoggle. So what did "the most accountable and open government in B.C. history" do with said damning report? The answer is they tried to bury it and never let it see the light of day. Fortuneatly some intrepid individual, using the freedom of information act, was able to obtain a copy of this report and then the press, even low-brow canwest, had no choice but to print it. Now 3 translink votes and many lies later look at what we're stuck with. So much for democracy and accountability. All we got was corrupt politicians, evil corporations, a massive debt for a bunch of white elephant projects and this lousy olympic tee-shirt!

So how do you like being P-3ed on from a great height so far?? P-3: pernicious, particuliarly unaccountable, and preternaturally stupid. Yeah, Brent, let's all have a good weep for the wealthy of BC and their filthy tainted uncampaigned-on taxcut, announced the day after the election and then used as an excuse to set social justice back 30 years and sell BC to the yankees at nickles on the dollar...how do you sleep?...are you Brent M. that posts those ridiculous, reeking of yuppie privelege remarks at Canwest.Com. If so, I'd love a one-on-one debate where you can't hide behind Canwest thread-stacking...Brent -if you're that Brent- thinks the rich are the new Nordic super-race...

How many bribes were paid ? that's the real question

As Alan says above, the route along Arbutus was a much better route for the RAV line. A study found it would have had as many users as a line up Cambie, and yet its route would have been AN EXISTING RAIL LINE. A dozen fly-overs where busy streets are crossed, a dozen stations, and the thing's done. Maybe, with a new government in Victoria this May, this will happen. Come on, Carole!

Yes, Bailey, RAV does INDEED go directly to the Richmond Casino, yet another reason, why the BC liars are so eager to shove it down people's throats. There MUST be some HIGHLY EFFECTIVE F.O.I. requests that could be made around this issue...cross shareholding perhaps...?

There is ALREADY the 98 B-line to Richmond, and Richmond center is ALREADY easy to get to quickly. The problem, is that once you get to Richmond center, you can spend as much as an HOUR getting to outlying areas of Richmond, because, quite frankly, THE BUS SERVICE IN RICHMOND STINKS!! Once the RAV line is built bus service is going to be even WORSE, because express bus routes will be not only drastically cut back to pay for RAV, but will also WITHOUT EXCEPTION, be funnelled onto the RAV line to increase "ridership" and because cutbacks will leave little choice. The business class, the main airport customers, will almost never use the RAV line - show me a tired, spoiled businessman that wants to get off a long flight then struggle on to RAV with luggage. Additionally, there seems to be some kind of quasi free-enterprise zone built on taxpayer-owned land at the airport, (actually said to be so intense there are engineering concerns as to whether bedrock-poor Richmond land will support it!!) and gordo's owners want an express train of low wage workers ready. You can also be sure that the quickest transit trip in town will be to the Richmond casine...good thing the BC liars aren't expanding gambling...tell me another.

To the nameless poster of the PPP comment at 1:20. Why bother with such an inane comment? Fools comments like fools faces are too often seen in public places. If you have something intelligent to add to the debate post it otherwise ........

Do we have two "James" on this thread, or one who's opinion of RAV has changed? Maybe y'all could differentiate yourselves with a James 01 and an James 02?

Any ball park figures on how much a ride on this thing is going to cost??

Oh just $3.25 for a two-zone ride and $3.5 billion in taxpayer debt, but hey, don't worry we'll be too busy worrying about paying off the olympics and stopping the right from reducing the Canada Pension Plan to a sleeping bag and a large jar of peanut butter...especially if the current media monopoly continues...

So now Vancouverites wake up from the slumber over RAV! Where were the good Vancouver burghers when Richmond city councillors were lying down and saying that the RAV line will be built over their dead bodies? Sleeping off their drunken overinflated real estate value binge is my guess. Nobody in Richmond wants the RAV line. As Poorboy mentioned above, the bus system already stinks and it's only going to get worse. This above-ground RAV line has been shoved down our throats and all with the complicity of city of Vancouver planning officials and Vancouver city councillors, especially your mayor.

Everyone knows that politicians cannot be trusted to plan and organise government...that's why we have elections to monitor and discipline them for errors. Advocates of PPPs are not satisfied, however, and want to have the market solve our problems. Alas, this amounts in the end to letting those same fallible and self-interested politicians choose a "partner", endow it with the powers of government and give it a multiple decade claim on the public, far exceeding their own short term hold. Of course, all must be secret, so public oversight diminished. You may be comforted by this, if you think that the people of BC are inherently incompetent to mind their own affairs, and that the bright minds who have attained power in one of the handful of large firms able to bid are destined (even without trying) to be better. But if you think it is the incentives that are the problem not the cast of characters, PPPs provide little reason to celebrate. The private "partners" will tend to their own concerns and resort to law courts whenever dissatisfied with the behaviour of their contract bound "public". For those advocates of PPPs, I wonder if you think BC would be better off if Mr Clark had devised a long term contract for building and operating his beloved fast ferries – not one that meets the market test, as you might wish: there is no market, but one that he would have been satisfied with and willing to commit the taxpayer to funding. I expect that many people will look back fondly on the days when our governments could be thrown out on the mere technicality of its being Election Day.

I'm NO FAN OF P3s(!!!!) but as someone who followed the whole RAV drama, I'm sort of surprised that these people seem so shocked. As far as I recall cut and cover was always one of the options and it was put forward as a way to reduce the expense of tunneling (one of the more massive costs of this project). I just read the detailed reports - and that is what you need to do if you really want to know what is going on with one of these projects. You certainly can't expect to read it in their press releases or expect them to set up a special meeting with your interest group.

Edmonton built its LRT line with a combination of on-grade, cut and cover and bored tunnels. Tyee, get a writer on the job and print something on a real, relatively recent and Canadian experience. I recall the Jasper Avenue section being done as cut and cover and I'm sure the impact is still being felt there; Jasper Ave today is no fun to look at.

I spend several hours a day reading and writing on economics. Looking at the examples and horror stories all over the world, the PPPs are the biggest con jobs in existence. The letters PPP do not really mean Public Private Partnerships, but Plundering the Public Purse. It is happening all over the world, where crooked and gullible governments fall for it. We saw what happened at the building of the Coquihalla for example. Costs can not be cut, only transferred on others. The purpose of all economic theories of the past and like of the presently reigning neoclassical market economy theory is not supply, but to collectivize, expropriate and rob people to divert the benefits into pockets of the most powerful. Basically the same as the former Soviet state capitalist dictatorships under a different coloured banner. All of these big companies have and employ whole departments of lawyers whose job is to break contracts and increase the costs.

Hey transportation geek, watch the nn's, I trademarked geek as related to nn's years ago.

In fact when Tony Blair's "thirdway" sellout, george bush fawning government encouraged P-3s in London on the bus service, routes that were once one fare, whole routes became subdivided into different private company fiefdoms, with riders obliged to disembark, and buy a new ticket, whenever they entered a different feifdom. CBC also had a documentary on water privatization schemes in France and other european countries, where outraged populations were again and again forced to result to class action lawsuits when companies continually promised no fee increases, and very frequently at least DOUBLED water rates. It's not hard to imagine the BC liberals doing the same thing, as they care ONLY about are their wealthy friends and owners.

cut & cover = class-action lawsuit

For more information on RAV and RAVCO visit http://transview.cjb.net Vancouver's newst website for and by transit users and operators

With RAV, Sea-to-Sky, and 2010, there will be plenty of scandals for the NDP to bash the Libs when these are ultimately revealed (thnk Devine in Saskatchewan). But, just as the Libs are bashing the NDP at every opportunity, what good will it do us, at (in round numbers) $10 billion in the hole...........

Just for clarification: Translink chair McCallum's payback for throwing his weight behind Cambie RAV is the twinning of the Port Mann brdge by his Surrey compatriot and fellow SET (Surrey Election Team) party flunky, now Minister of Transport, Kevin Falcon. This is how money talks in BC politics. The rape of Surrey (50,000 trees in 3 years) is set now to continue at an even higher pace, given all the new commuters to come. The developers who fund these guys say "Thank you !! Thank you!!"
Surrey is getting screwed even more than Vancouver. This (RAV) is the second time our bus acquisition has been put back due to lack of funds (the first was the Millenium line-now losing 25 million a year). Even if Arbutus had less population density, initially, to fill trains (not proven--actual studies have shown virtually no difference to Cambie) imagine what transit improvements could be done elsewhere for the 1 billion dollar savings!

Yes, indeed, RAV line will go down as the boondoggle/white elephant/public scandal/all-round public expenditure outrage of this century for this region. As others have expressed more eloquently, this project is the final nail in the transportation coffin for GVRD because we will probably be paying it off for an eternity - at least until global warming wipes us all out and even debating public transportation corridors will be a moot point! Arbutus Line was the route to use for countless reasons. 1)Fraction of the cost, including paying out CP Rail its requisite $100M the company had been demanding for the land, building the system and still have had millions leftover to sink into buses and future east/west connector lines. 2) High enough density to support the route - has anyone noticed the explosion in residential/commercial development between Broadway and 16th of late? Has anyone noticed the explosion in vehicular traffic along Arbutus of late, is more like it. 3) Any city that would fail to utilize such an obvious transit corridor begging to be developed truly needs to give its planning head a severe shake. Further, that great sucking sound you hear is the sound of all future transit dollars being poured into the RAV project. I have spoken with countless busdrivers who tell me the existing bus inventory is falling apart, buses aren't being replaced NOW. It's hard to imagine 5, 10 years on as the region struggles with the debtloads of RAV that there will be much spare cash to maintain and increase a worthy bus system. Boston's 'big dig' project was only completed recently for $18 billion, for what was expected to be at a cost of $4.5 billion, and years overschedule. Cut-and-cover will now probably keep costs down somewhat on the RAV project, but at what other costs? The BART system in San Francisco was built over 30 years ago using this same method - and what was so "confidental and proprietary" with SNC-Lavalin's "new" techiques? The entire project is scandalous and corrupt beyond belief and depressing beyond measure that the region would sell itself out to this degree.