Dear Mr. Meisner:

I would like to respond to your letter outlining the government’s proposal to revoke the 2005 agreement stipulating that no fixed linked would be permitted between the mainland and Toronto Island.

 Your letter mentions “a strong business case for a pedestrian tunnel”. I am uncertain as to what you mean by such words. Are you referring to a public subsidy to private corporations – Porter and Air Canada – a figure on the far side of $45 million dollars? If I were an executive officer or a stockholder of one of these corporations such a subsidy would, indeed, seem like “a strong business case” since I would be a direct beneficiary, and at no cost. However, since I and 99% of the one million plus citizens living in the immediate vicinity of this proposed subsidy would be footing the bill through our taxes, I fail to see any business case whatsoever. What I do see is a profligate waste of valuable tax dollars that would be better spent on improving the public land transit infrastructure of the City of Toronto, far better spent since they would improve the daily lives of the overwhelming majority of taxpayers. I respectfully submit that a far stronger business case supports initiatives of this public nature.

 I would also like to point out that you ask for comment on a number of issues corollary to the proposed tunnel subsidy – “such as potential economic benefits for the City of Toronto” and maintenance of the current ferry service. However, you omit any mention of issues germane to the fixed link, such as what impact the tunnel will have on the natural and social environment of the City of Toronto in the forms of increased air, water, and noise pollution. Tens of thousands of people live within earshot of the airport and millions use the waterfront as an invaluable recreational resource. These too need to be accounted when you premise the case for the tunnel subsidy on supposed “potential economic benefits”.

 Finally, I find it discouraging and reprehensible that the invitation for comment on this absurd subsidy envisages only economic benefits – to private stockholders alone, no less – and elides the potential economic, environmental, and social _deficits_ for the taxpayers of Toronto. Since I can see no rational case for the subsidy, nor any direct benefit to those who will foot the bill, I am forced to conclude that this proposal is pure pork-barrel.

 I respectfully propose that Transport Canada reject the proposed changes to the current legislation.

 Yours sincerely,

 Dr. Colman Hogan