Victoria saanich real estate, homes, apartments for sale & rent ::
Iam looking for a gay male room-mate who is open minded laid back easy going and open to a new idea to cut his rent costs and is willing to share a large
http://victoria.kijiji.ca/f-saanich-housing-W0QQCatIdZ34QQKeywordZsaanichHOME |
At least that's according to this article:
http://www.cfra.com/headlines/index.asp?cat=3&nid=26323
The Federal Government is preparing legislation to cut the rent for Canada's airports.
I don't think they make a conscious decision to "screw the travelling public." On the other hand, they may decide to build more than is necessary in the misplaced hope of attracting business. As a passenger, I pay a significant part of costs.
Unsurprisingly, as I have been known to fly (self) paid J, I'm not so concerned about the costs of "overbuilding"... I'm concerned more about the costs of "underbuilding but paying like it was overbuilding" -- DEN and MUC are great. T1 at YYZ sucks rocks. If they'd paid what they did and we ended up with real services with a large amount of seating, wide hallways, sensible parking, actual queue management, cellular service that worked, etc. I'd have no complaints.
Simon
And I guess that pretty much means that there is not a damn thing that we can do about it... :mad:
One of the points that Doug Young made related to the accountability of the airport boards. If you are unhappy with an "investment" decision by your local board, what influence do you have on their future behaviour other than telling them you are not happy? You can't vote on the appointment of board members, and if you were to write to the Minister of Transport, he'd tell you that these decisions have been turned over to "communities" ... which is code for a small group of unelected and not-necessarily representative board members with opaque (or non-existant) accountabilities to airlines and their customers.
Accountability and governance are definately issues, but I feel that local interests are better served now than when under the direct control of TC. Without having a locally elected board or some other similar mechanisim (i.e. local people have actual shares), I am not sure how to get better accountability. With a locally elected board you run into problems of experience of how business or airports work, which exists to some extent under the current system but would be exacerbated if there was an election.
Personally I would like to see a share structure of publically traded shares with a portion of shares with the local municipalities to balance both sets of interests.
I agree this will be a good thing, as long at the airports doin't use the rent cost savings to accelerate their capital programs :p !
It is too bad the Feds have allowed the local airport authorities to spend like drunken sailors for so long before stepping in. I'm afraid the horse left the barn a long time ago, so bringing real stakeholders other than the construction industry and civic boosters to the table will not really help that much for quite a few years.
Not sure if this will matter or not -- especially given that the Conservatives are now thinking of voting down the budget...
Agree, if the government falls down it would not matter
It's also too bad that the airport authorities don't take more input from PASSENGERS who use their "facilities". On 680 News on Friday, there was a person from YHZ on the radio who was talking about taking input from all their stakeholders, including (explicitly) passengers.
The GTAA person who came off just rambled off that "everything is great" despite the construction.
Parnel and I have discussed a GTAA DO, and it was mentioned at the YYZ DO as well, as the airport "facilities" and "services" here in YYZ are at the source of many a traveller's complaint that gets directed at the airline. Last I heard, he was working his AC contacts to help set this up. Let's hope this comes to fruition. Not that I would expect the GTAA to actually listen and make changes, but it would be interesting to at least get to rant at them about their "facilities" and "services" :rolleyes:
The story in the Groan and Wail this morning says that the government will lower the rent but insist on the inclusion of airline representatives on the boards of local airport authorities. I think both are good moves.
Two other things that are interesting in the article: Doug Young (Remember him?) "deeply regrets" the handover of airports to local authorities because many of them are gouging travellers. There are few politicians who would ever admit to implementing poor public policy.
And, just to confirm the notion that most politicians are, well, politicians ... the article says that Ralph Goodale is ready to support lower rents. The Globe points out that his support would mean that Regina and Saskatoon would not have to start paying rent next January.
I'm not cyncial ... ;)
Ah yes, but (assuming AAs did have golf courses), would they really use that revenue to lower fees for the main business?
As not for profit non share corporations the profit would either have to be reinvested into facility or their fees would have to be reduced to match expenses.
As they do have boards that typically represent the local region and the Feds, their responsibility would be to ensure that the above occurs.
Maybe I am a bit more optmimistic that some and believe that the AA are not out there to screw the travelling public, but I do not see that happening, excpet to some extent in YYZ.
I suggest that the whole article be read not just what was quoted.
I agree with PE.
There is no way that you could represent all airlines on a board and if you just chose the largest, in YEGs case AC and WJ, would they represent what is best for community or their own interests? Likely their own.
exAC, not sure how long you have be out but at YEG they do have an airline consultative committee and other merchant associations that meet with the authority on a regular basis so they do get input.
....exAC, not sure how long you have be out but at YEG they do have an airline consultative committee and other merchant associations that meet with the authority on a regular basis so they do get input.
Talk About Travel::
Should we rent a car for exploring? Rent a house and make that our base? I think our Ottawa traveler should be ready to go.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/discussion/2008/12/18/DI2008121802317_pf.htmlHOME |
It has been quite a few years since I sat on the ACC, but when I did it was the transition from TC to ERAA and the ability to get any input dropped to almost nil. The airline managers that got along well with the ERAA did so that they were in-line for a job when they left their own airline.
I still keep in touch with people at various airports across the country and they say that the ACC's are good for setting up the annual golf tournament and BBQ but not much else. The airport authorities present a plan and then go ahead and do it without taking suggestions from the users.
....His point about if you have representation it would have to be all airlines that use an airport and the paralysis that would ensue is valid. .....
There was a system in place at all airports prior to the airport authorities coming on the scene. It was called 'Consultative Committees'.
The airlines, the food outlets and all of the retailers met in committee that Transport Canada met with many times a year. There was a sub-group of airlines and airside operational people that dealt with issues directly concerning airline issues such as schedules, parking, security screening, passenger flows, holdroom space, runways, taxiways etc.
The discussions would take place between the airport operator and its customers about future plans, operational problem solving and dispute resolution. The discussions would get quite lively at times, but the understanding was that there was to be a mutual agreement.
The new airport authorities did not like this mechanism and withdrew their support. They would not attend meetings or acknowledge the presence of these committees. The 'paralysis' that ensued only came from the airport authorities not wishing to participate.
We all have to remember that the average traveller doesn't care so much about who's on the airport authority board as the airport taxes that they do see added to their ticket costs and hearing about how airport authorities build golf courses.
Are they fees that are paid to airport authorities really taxes, either through your ticket or AIF?
I think not, since the authoritiues are not a government body they can not be considerred taxes but a fee for a service that you are reciveving - just like any other service.
What airport authority built a golf course? If one did, which I highly doubt, it would bring in revenue that could lower other fees needed to support the business, sounds like good business sens, if there was a demand for that service.
I'm assuming you are excluding the GTAA from this list?
Yes somewhat (as you have read in my last post).
Most of the authorites do have customer service as high priorities. I believe YHZ received top marks for this recently and YEG, YVR and YYC consistently have improved their customer service as can be read in the annual reports and just using those facilities.
Yes, but unless someone can represent the airlines on the board they will still play "screw the airlines" and by extension its customers. Maybe the iarlines themselves could vote in a board member or two to represent their common interests.
It would not be in an airport authorities interest to play "screw the airlines" as they are their biggest customers. The AA need to cover their costs - one of the biggest being rent to the Feds - they do this through fees, and even when these fees are set the Feds take an ever increasing chunk of it through participation rent. The rent is based on revenue not on passenger numbers so to cover a 10% increase in rent requires a larger than 10% increase fees (i.e. compounded) to make up for the additional rent on the higher fee, and so on.
Hooray for the new head of the YEG authority!
His point about if you have representation it would have to be all airlines that use an airport and the paralysis that would ensue is valid. To have only one airline would defeat competition - although I'm sure that's what some want....
Secondly, it's YYZ that's broken why destroy the others.
The new head of the Edmonton Airports Authority makes a statement on this issue.
This is the first real public posture I have seen this guy take and I am not impressed. It looks like he is maintaining his predecessor policy of 'the airlines are not my customer'.
http://www.canada.com/edmonton/edmontonjournal/news/business/story.html?id=10c468ff-017a-4a69-9402-a095b90aac69
What a think to say is this?
He said airports already are required to consult with airlines on landing fee changes, and publicly post them 60 days in advance.
And there's no more regulated industry in Canada than airports, said Milley, chairman of the Canadian Airports Council. "I don't think they can point to an airport in Canada today that is not accountable and transparent. Transport Canada regulates every move we make. We're way more regulated than the airlines."
But the cynic in me predicts that GTAA would just put on a pony show for the cameras and blame everything on AC in some way, shape, form or matter. The media will buy it and wow look, GTAA gets away with it again.
Wonder if this will make PE happy as his beloved YYC conx to USA as unuserfiendly as it is because AC says airport authority doesn't listen to its input.
On the subject as a whole, I beleive real change when I see it. Does that make me cynical or just a realist?
On the subject as a whole, I beleive real change when I see it. Does that make me cynical or just a realist?
I'd say realist.
We all have to remember that the average traveller doesn't care so much about who's on the airport authority board as the airport taxes that they do see added to their ticket costs and hearing about how airport authorities build golf courses.
FewMiles..
Hey, when is this? Have you and Parnel come up with a date yet?
Simon
As you may have surmised, he's travelling right now so we haven't traded barbs for a while! :)
When I refer to YEG do it's along the lines of the Standing Invitation for anyone to contact one of us to get together when they're in town! :D
... the board should represent the full breadth of those who use the airport, which should include both airlines and pasengers.
I agree with you.
Unfortunately I think that the authorities see themselves as experts on what the passenger wants because they have considerable travel budgets for paid J.
The part about giving airlines 60 days notice of fee increases, therefore they listen to airlines is bogus also.
The story in the Groan and Wail this morning says that the government will lower the rent but insist on the inclusion of airline representatives on the boards of local airport authorities. I think both are good moves.
Insisting that airlines are included on the GTAA,for example,would be a significant step in the right direction,IMO. ^
Au contraire as it was apparent from the last AC/YYC fiasco that AC was 100% at fault for not taking connecting baggage after Canada Customs to my next flight and in fact put up a fraudulent sign... I'll bring the letters to the next YEG do.
Hey, when is this? Have you and Parnel come up with a date yet?
Simon
So am I to understand that you would have preferred the airports to remain in the condition they were prior to handing over to local authorities?
The feds had left all of the airports in very poor condition and the airports desperately needed improvements. You will find most of the airport improvements are at an acceptable standard for a public space.
Most of the authorities do take their customers (passengers and carriers) very seriously and make improvements that reflect their needs. I am not sure if having airline representation on the Boards will do this, and if there is how would you do it? Does each carrier get a board member or does IATA? This could make for an unweildy board depending on the authority.
CANOE Travel - News - Archive::
Major U.S. airlines ready to cut more flights in 2009 Ottawa packages combine NHL hockey tickets, hotel accommodation
http://travel.canoe.ca/Travel/News/2009/archive.htmlHOME |
Airport hotels accommodation, Airport hotels athens greece ::
There are regional variations Toshiba R400 Vista Ready up scale restaurants Final Cut Express and iMovie Hugh with airport hotels jfk new york whoever.
http://dede570.007webs.com/airport-hotels-accommodation.htmlHOME |
There is no doubt that Transport Canada under-invested in airport infrastructure for many years and there was a need to re-invest. Having said that, and keeping in mind I am jaded by the YYZ experience, it seems that when the keys to the candy store are turned over to local organisations, many decide they need the biggest, shiniest mausoleum they can muster for some notion of "civic pride" or as a way to "attract" additional traffic that somehow never materializes.
What I want is a clean, functional airport that moves me through in the least amount of time possible. If they want to build a "mall" on site as a profit centre (a la Schipold - great) but if you're trying to do what Toronto did and build a "statement" to the glory of the city, then you can keep it. Terminal 2 was ugly, but it worked (and we didn't have the world's second highest landing fees).
PS: look at the miserably long line ups through security at brand-new airports like YEG and YOW. Also have a look at the old terminals at YEG, YOW, YYC and T2 YYZ to see hugely under-utlized space thanks to over-building by the local AA. if this was the private sector, heads would have roled long ago for such profligate over-investment.
And I guess that pretty much means that there is not a damn thing that we can do about it... :mad:
Well,it will be interesting to see what happens if we manage to pull off this GTAA DO, and the media show up ;)
But the cynic in me predicts that GTAA would just put on a pony show for the cameras and blame everything on AC in some way, shape, form or matter. The media will buy it and wow look, GTAA gets away with it again.
I'm not so sure about that.
Can AC be blamed for the under the covers monopoly on food service in T1?
Can AC be blamed for the lack of elite lines (for any airline) at YYZ?
Can AC be blamed for the poor wireless service in T1?
If the appropriate questions are asked in the right way by the right people, it will be hard for them to squirm away ;)
I suggest that the whole article be read not just what was quoted.
I agree with PE.
There is no way that you could represent all airlines on a board and if you just chose the largest, in YEGs case AC and WJ, would they represent what is best for community or their own interests? Likely their own.
exAC, not sure how long you have be out but at YEG they do have an airline consultative committee and other merchant associations that meet with the authority on a regular basis so they do get input.
Yes, but unless someone can represent the airlines on the board they will still play "screw the airlines" and by extension its customers. Maybe the iarlines themselves could vote in a board member or two to represent their common interests.
Accountability and governance are definately issues, but I feel that local interests are better served now than when under the direct control of TC. Without having a locally elected board or some other similar mechanisim (i.e. local people have actual shares), I am not sure how to get better accountability. With a locally elected board you run into problems of experience of how business or airports work, which exists to some extent under the current system but would be exacerbated if there was an election.
Personally I would like to see a share structure of publically traded shares with a portion of shares with the local municipalities to balance both sets of interests.
The issue of accountability is indeed a complex question. Moving on to another perspective for a moment: why did the federal government devolve airports to local communities? It wasn't because some policy wizard persuaded the government that local interests would be better served, nor was there a line-up of high-minded civic leaders pounding on the door of the Minister of Transport. No. The only two devolution arguments that ever won over a federally-elected politican were a) buying fed-prov peace (such as the transfer of EI Part II human resource training to any province that wanted it), or b) meeting a program review spending reduction target. In the case of airports, it was hardly a fed-prov issue, because they leap-frogged right over the provinces and turned them over to communities. No, the underlying motive was to shift exisiting costs and, perhaps more importantly, to shift the cost of future improvements off the federal books.
Was it good public policy? Maybe, but if local communities felt better served in the end, that was an unanticipated feature.
Maybe the iarlines themselves could vote in a board member or two to represent their common interests.
Given the long history of acrimony between AC & WS, is this all that likely? The thing I'm kind of curious to see is whether the various airport authorities are more interested in their principles or their pocketbooks.
PS: look at the miserably long line ups through security at brand-new airports like YEG and YOW. Also have a look at the old terminals at YEG, YOW, YYC and T2 YYZ to see hugely under-utlized space thanks to over-building by the local AA. if this was the private sector, heads would have roled long ago for such profligate over-investment.
I beg to differ on the security lines at YEG, they move much quicker no that it is all centralized.
YEG has an interesting problem, they need to expand their transborder area due to their success at attracting new non-stop service to the US, also they are holding off any major renovations/changes to the North (old terminal) until traffic warrants, except for some chages to accomdate the Westjet traffic with additional bridges that will get used
The new head of the Edmonton Airports Authority makes a statement on this issue.
This is the first real public posture I have seen this guy take and I am not impressed. It looks like he is maintaining his predecessor policy of 'the airlines are not my customer'.
http://www.canada.com/edmonton/edmontonjournal/news/business/story.html?id=10c468ff-017a-4a69-9402-a095b90aac69
What a think to say is this?
Notice how he uses the "community" word: "Airlines serve a very different purpose, to give a return to shareholders, while the authority serves the community." It's a feel-good word with populist appeal that can mean almost anything. If we have to live with this model of governance, the board should represent the full breadth of those who use the airport, which should include both airlines and pasengers.
Parnel and I have discussed a GTAA DO, and it was mentioned at the YYZ DO as well, as the airport "facilities" and "services" here in YYZ are at the source of many a traveller's complaint that gets directed at the airline. Last I heard, he was working his AC contacts to help set this up. Let's hope this comes to fruition. Not that I would expect the GTAA to actually listen and make changes, but it would be interesting to at least get to rant at them about their "facilities" and "services" :rolleyes:
And if the media got wind of this initiative, it would perhaps put some pressure on the GTAA to polish their image. ;)
... Maybe I am a bit more optmimistic that some and believe that the AA are not out there to screw the travelling public, but I do not see that happening, excpet to some extent in YYZ.
I don't think they make a conscious decision to "screw the travelling public." On the other hand, they may decide to build more than is necessary in the misplaced hope of attracting business. As a passenger, I pay a significant part of costs.
One of the points that Doug Young made related to the accountability of the airport boards. If you are unhappy with an "investment" decision by your local board, what influence do you have on their future behaviour other than telling them you are not happy? You can't vote on the appointment of board members, and if you were to write to the Minister of Transport, he'd tell you that these decisions have been turned over to "communities" ... which is code for a small group of unelected and not-necessarily representative board members with opaque (or non-existant) accountabilities to airlines and their customers.
Hooray for the new head of the YEG authority!
His point about if you have representation it would have to be all airlines that use an airport and the paralysis that would ensue is valid. To have only one airline would defeat competition - although I'm sure that's what some want....
That's not quite true either...if AC and Ws are 80% of the traffic there then one or both of them should be on the board due to their size in that market and maybe one rep from the US airlines could sit,but they probably don't have anyone senior enough in Canada to take that on.
As for YYZ being broken, that's not quite true either. The board of YYZ is full of developers and pro construction types who are feathering the nests of their industry by continuing a very expensive and extravagent construction effort. Their ways continue into the monopoly of services provided at the airport and, where one day you will also see GTAA personnel outsourced to contractors once construction is complete, if that ever happens. I think that boondoggle would make adscam seem miniscule IMO if anyone ever dug deep.
I think that boondoggle would makes adscam seem miniscule IMO if anyone ever dug deep.
Welcome back, Parnel.
Your point leads back to the issue of accountability. Unlike the sponsorship debacle, you will never see a federal cabinet minister rise in the House of Commons to explain an airport authority's actions, even though these authorities were given vast and valuable public assets and what is perilously close to taxation powers.
I'm not saying the model won't work, it just needs significant adjustment.
Ah yes, but (assuming AAs did have golf courses), would they really use that revenue to lower fees for the main business?
Somehow, both the cynic and the realist in me is extremely downright skeptical...
Most of the authorities do take their customers (passengers and carriers) very seriously and make improvements that reflect their needs. I am not sure if having airline representation on the Boards will do this, and if there is how would you do it? Does each carrier get a board member or does IATA? This could make for an unweildy board depending on the authority.
I'm assuming you are excluding the GTAA from this list?
Otherwise we wouldn't have had a ridiculous new terminal with shoddy services (which are a monopoly under the covers, IIRC), poor queue management, bad design compared to other new facilities, etc?
Simon
It is too bad the Feds have allowed the local airport authorities to spend like drunken sailors for so long before stepping in. I'm afraid the horse left the barn a long time ago, so bringing real stakeholders other than the construction industry and civic boosters to the table will not really help that much for quite a few years.
So am I to understand that you would have preferred the airports to remain in the condition they were prior to handing over to local authorities?
The feds had left all of the airports in very poor condition and the airports desperately needed improvements. You will find most of the airport improvements are at an acceptable standard for a public space.
Most of the authorities do take their customers (passengers and carriers) very seriously and make improvements that reflect their needs. I am not sure if having airline representation on the Boards will do this, and if there is how would you do it? Does each carrier get a board member or does IATA? This could make for an unweildy board depending on the authority.
Wonder if this will make PE happy as his beloved YYC conx to USA as unuserfiendly as it is because AC says airport authority doesn't listen to its input....
Au contraire as it was apparent from the last AC/YYC fiasco that AC was 100% at fault for not taking connecting baggage after Canada Customs to my next flight and in fact put up a fraudulent sign... I'll bring the letters to the next YEG do.
I have little sympathy for AC and their knee-jerk-blame-everyone-but-themselves-attitude.
P.S. I hope that AC representation isn't forced on YEG as that would be ludicrous after the stuff that was done for them in the new Terminal and is now not used.
Not sure if this will matter or not -- especially given that the Conservatives are now thinking of voting down the budget...
 How much does getting a small tattoo on your hip/stomach hurt?
 Do anyone else have an itchy anus? ?
|
Ottawa ready to cut airport rent & give airlines more input in airport affairs