Detailed rebuttal of Porter spin, here … Say No Petition, here.
Danica and I went to watch the Porter PR machine work the room at a civic meeting in Scarborough tonight. Before we even entered the auditorium, we were handed glossy leaflets promoting Porter plans for Island airport expansion. They want to overturn the ban on jets, too.
Inside, it immediately became clear that Porter boss Deluce had a stack of employees in the audience. Nothing says he can’t do that, but his claque could not outdo the opposition. Porter has spent plenty on lobbyists, publicists and advertising. Money talks.
Money talks, twists and distorts. Jets are “whisper jets”, 400 metre runway extensions into the lake are “modest”. “Polls” have one third of Torontonians flying Porter. Yeah, sure.
Money also connects. One of the funniest jokes of the evening was unintentional. Playing down Porter’s violations of curfew times, Deluce bowed his head and said that his company had paid fines for these transgressions. Guess who collects the fines? Porter’s expansion-backing friends at the Toronto Port Authority. And guess who gives the Toronto Port Authority a huge part of its income? Porter, of course.
If the Toronto waterfront is to stay out from under jet traffic, citizens will have to defeat a persistent, wily foe. Loud voices, publicity tricks and determination will be required.
10 comments
Comments are closed.
I wish we had copies of the slides or a recording of what was said. None of this is corporate greed Porter tells us, they are only following their customer demands – WE want more flights to more places and we don’t want to haul our butts all the way to Pearson airport either! According to one slide, there aren’t very many Porter planes flying over scarborough anyway – funny the map displayed looked like it was downloaded at 10 am: http://porterflightpaths.ca
Porter Airlines and Porter fans are unalterably in favour of their expansion plans. The majority of Torontonians, who receive no benefit from the service, will have to speak up against the noise, pollution and traffic congestion being proposed. Let your councillor know that Porter’s proposal is an unpopular vote loser.
For the record, I’m in favour of the Scarborough RT, burying the Gardiner while putting public parkland on top (and free post secondary education for all who are smart enough). But I don’t see the problem with the jets at the island. The advantages are clear: More jobs, more tourism, more business travel, more convenience for Torontonians. And less congestion because fewer people have to drive to Pearson. An extra benefit is that little jets are fun to ride in.
In my view the noise and pollution issues are total red herrings. The airport is at the foot of Bathurst adjacent to the Gardiner, the Lakeshore and Queens Key. It’s noisy down there. All the time. Thousands of cars, cabs, trucks, buses, giant diesel go-trains, giant diesel passenger trains, giant diesel freight trains. Every day. Throw in a few motor yatchs, island ferries, great lakes steamships, a few sports teams plus the CNE and the waterfront isn’t exactly quiet. Anyone who notices the odd turboprop or small jet in the midst of this is listening pretty hard. Besides, it’s a city. They are supposed to be noisy. And many of those noise makers are spewing junk into the air, so to speak. I’m pretty sure that a diesel train or the island ferry can out pollute a turbo prop or a small jet. And the last time I looked air quality wasn’t much of a problem in Toronto anyway. If it is, the trains and 18 wheelers should go first. I think it’s all much ado about nothing. I’m with Porter on this one.
Porter fans would like to be able to take jets to and from from Billy Bishop airport. I accept that no argument against jets will move those opinions.
By 2015, there will be a 25-minute express train running between Union Station and Pearson, removing the need for downtowners to drive there. That puts pressure on Deluce to get his jets approved quickly but I don’t think he will succeed. Not only is there significant public opposition, there is serious doubt as to whether or not the CS100 jets will meet the noise restrictions imposed by the tripartite agreement governing airport operations. The noise rules must be met, or it’s no go. Fudging the numbers is not an option.
The tripartite agreement expires in 2033.
When considering issues of air pollution, greenhouse gasses and traffic congestion, we see things differently. I agree that the diesel train to Pearson should have been electric. We are told that it will be (expensively) converted to be electric, but that remains to be seen.
Car traffic concentrated around Billy Bishop is estimated to increase by over 1 million cars per year, based on Porter’s hopes for increased passenger loads.
I don’t think we need to add to the noise and pollution on our waterfront for the sake of the 1000 jobs Deluce says his jet plan will deliver. If he takes those jobs to Pearson, won’t that be just as good?
I don’t see what most of us have to gain by letting Porter put jets on our waterfront, so why do it?
I might buy the the express train point if it was an above ground extension of the TTC subway like in Chicago, New York, London, Paris, Madrid etc. One that left Union station every five minutes. Instead it is a giant electric-diesel soot belching monstrosity that is going to cost a fortune to ride, around $45-$55, and will leave for the airport once in a blue moon, with no stops on the way. And once at the airport you’ll have to walk forever or shuttle to reach your terminal. A complete boondoggle. Who in their right mind is going to drag their butt and their luggage all the way to union station to wait around for this “express” train when they can have an airport limo pick them up at their front door for the same cost. Nobody, is who. With Billy Bishop, however, many people will take the TTC to Union station and take the free shuttle to the airport, saving congestion and lessening pollution.
The car traffic increase by a million cars per year is clearly inaccurate. Do the math (1MM/365/24/60=1.9 cars per minute 24/7 every day of the year). Because of a few extra flights? Hogwash. It reminds me of the naysayers in our neighbourhood who claimed the construction of a 15 story apartment on the southwest corner of Keewatin and Mt. Pleasant was going to cause massive traffic jams. Apartment built. Zero noticeable increase.
As I’ve said before, I just don’t see noise as an issue. Not even a bit. You spend more time downtown than I do, when was the last time a turboprop bothered you. In fact, if it was up to me I would dissolve the tripartite agreement and allow corporate jets to fly in/out during business hours. To expect silence in the core of a thriving city is to me ludicrous. Let the jets blend into the background, or as I prefer to think of it, the aural mosaic of the city.
Pollution wise I don’t know if jets are less dirty than turboprops, but if the alternative is to fly them out of Pearson anyway the point is moot. Let’s be truthful, if society is serious about greenhouse gases etc. the problem won’t be solved by cherry picking a jet here or converting the odd train to electric. Bigger, gutsier solutions are needed, like way higher gasoline taxes and a surcharge on passenger car engines above a certain size or horsepower (which would drive Canadians into fuel efficient vehicles and cut fossil fuel consumption by a third). If you want to drive a giant SUV, pay for it, through the nose.
Commerce is about facilitating the movement of people, products and ideas. Adding more flights and jets to the island airport does just that. Porter claims 1000 new jobs, which is great. But what about the additional jobs created by more people in the city. In addition to classic business (finance etc.) hotels, bars, restaurants, taxi drivers, museums, theatre etc. will all benefit if downtown Toronto is more convenient.
Lastly, let’s talk about the people who use the island airport. Many are frequent users, flying weekly or even several times a week to major commercial (and tourism) destinations like Boston, New York, Washington, Quebec City, Montreal, Ottawa and Chicago. Why do they fly Porter? Porter is just way more convenient. Saves time, saves money, saves congestion on balance (short drive in traffic vs long drive in traffic). But for many it’s more than convenience. I know several people who use Porter (including my wife) and to a person they love the experience. The airport is small and friendly with a great lounge. There is less hassle, free wifi, and better food. Both security and customs are much easier and much faster. The whole experience is just more manageable and therefore more pleasant. And to top it off, the planes leave and arrive on time (no waiting in line behind a 747 going to Singapore).
I don’t see what we have to lose by letting Porter put jets on our waterfront and I firmly believe we have a lot to gain, so why not do it? Be brave Toronto; do something for a change. Say yes to jets.
There’s nothing stopping Porter from reproducing its popular lounge, free wifi and snacks at Pearson if it wants to expand into the jet business. The Billy Bishop turboprop business is an established fact and customers will continue to have all of the conveniences and pleasantries that Porter fans adore.
The issue is expansion. I do live close to Porter’s turboprops. They almost knock my helmet off when I cycle on the Leslie Spit. They are noisy, frequent (every 10 minutes) and completely at odds with enjoyment of the bit of nature we have managed to to keep available for city dwellers. Lakeside condo occupants have to pause phone conversations each time a Porter plane interrupts. I guess it’s a question of whose quality of life we value … Porter fliers or the others. Others are already making a sacrifice for Porter, which has grown exponentially, even without jets.
There is only one reason Porter wants jets. To add a million passengers a year to its flights. The additional people have to get to and from Billy Bishop somehow. I believe that most would travel by car, taxi and shuttle bus, just as they do now. How can this not increase traffic congestion downtown?
Agreed, it is a crime that the express train is diesel. I don’t see a problem with no stops along the way, from Union to Pearson (and back). That’s what “express” means. Danica would like to see one stop at Islington, even though it would slow the connection to downtown.
The popularity of the Porter service, worthy as it is, owes to the woeful lack of planning in Toronto. We shouldn’t have to choose dirty diesel trains because we ignored the need to hook the international airport to the subway line. But here we are. We need to be looking away from Porter expansion as a stopgap solution and focus on the better examples of the cities on your list… London, New York, Chicago, Madrid, and so on. None of them have a big downtown jet airport, do they?
BTW, although the express train is a side issue and don’t love it either, Wikipedia says “The UP Express will travel from Union to Pearson in 25 minutes departing every 15 minutes, seven days a week. It is expected to carry 5,000 passengers per day, replacing approximately 1.2 million car trips in the first year alone.”
No estimate of the ride price, but I imagine it will be somewhere in the middle between private limo (50-60 bucks with tip) and TTC’s subway + bus (3 bucks).
My last hurrah, in no particular order.
The issue is expansion. Agreed. And I’m for it. It’s good for the city.
Ah, the express train. If the airport train is less than $45 I’ll buy you lunch at the establishment of your choice. Pearson averages 100M passengers per day, so the train would carry five percent. Maybe. If you are staying in a downtown hotel you might take the train. If someone else is paying you might take the train. But what group of two or more would take the train when they could share the cost of a more convenient limo and save money. Just doesn’t make sense. The train will be a money losing disaster, methinks.
Congestion. Hmm. One million passengers per year. Hmm. Sounds like a lot until you start to do the math. Assuming Porter operates 16 hours a day that would average 171 passengers per hour. Less people than can fit in a single subway car. Not what I call congestion. BTW, the TTC moves 2.8 million passengers per day.
This whole thing is much ado about nothing. The effect of Porter expansion will be virtually unnoticeable. List the good, list the bad. Appreciable good, virtually no bad. Go Porter.
Go Porter, with the service you are offering. If you want to go to jets, go to Pearson.
I’d pay money to watch 171 Porter jet passengers pack themselves and their baggage into a single subway car.