Highway 401 in Toronto.iStockphoto
Letters to the Editor should be exclusive to The Globe and Mail. Include your name, address and daytime phone number. Try to keep letters to fewer than 150 words. Letters may be edited for length and clarity. To submit a letter by e-mail, click here: letters@globeandmail.com
Re The High Cost of Canada’s ‘Free’ Roads (editorials, Aug. 24 and 26): While new tolls terrify politicians, and removing old ones clearly wins votes, free roads are really a subsidy to the car and oil industries, and a social and economic ecosystem that was the addiction of record in the 20th century.
Millennials are shunning driving licences; more and more voters have less and less interest in the continuing expansion of tarmac, or even its maintenance.
But there is another change afoot that may mean road-user charges will have to be addressed: The switch to electric vehicles will erode a fossil-fuel tax base critical to transportation infrastructure.
When in New Zealand last winter, I paid a highway tax. The owner of the vehicle I drove was able to prepurchase a number of highway trips for me, and would top up his account in due course. When in Chile, even in a rental vehicle, the transponder system made road tolls seamless, just part of the driving experience.
Even while we incentivize the purchase of electric vehicles, our leaders need to start thinking about the reality that travel in electric vehicles will have to attract road-user charges. If not, the whole infrastructure cost will be far from free and will have to be covered out of general revenue, with no contribution from fuel taxes.
Chris M. Campbell, Nanaimo, B.C.
User-pay systems tend to favour higher-income Canadians.
Someone with money, for instance, may not hesitate to take a toll road, the cost impact to them being minimal. A minimum-wage earner, on the other hand, may put off a tolled trip unless it was an emergency.
Toll roads of the past were rejected because they were unfair. As we live through a decade of low-income growth, charging tolls would benefit those who already have enough and penalize those who are struggling.
Income tax is not a free way of paying for roads – with taxes, wealthier people tend to pay more. It’s just fairer.
Sel Burrows, Winnipeg
By all and any means, bring on tolls. Anything that puts the “true” cost of driving front and centre – particularly as we struggle with carbon’s impact on climate – is a good thing.
Sandra Wilson, Winnipeg
In arguing for the privatization of roads, the example of a car driver on vacation is troublesome. Roads, for example, are also used by trucks, and much of the economy runs on trucking. So we will still pay for it – if not as taxpayers, then as consumers.
The advantage of public ownership and free-use roads is that the cost is paid through a progressive tax system. Privatization, on the other hand, puts the onus on consumers, and this will disproportionately burden the less well-off.
Either way, there is no free ride.
Brian P. H. Green, Thunder Bay
There is an easy way to bolster tax-funded road systems such as Montreal’s $4.4-billion Champlain Bridge: Adopt equitable user pay.
That is, our federal and provincial governments should levy high-enough gasoline and diesel taxes to cover 100 per cent of the cost of construction and maintenance of “free” roads.
Dale Mills, Guelph, Ont.
When it comes to roads, the proven political strategy is to spend little, never ever talk about tolls, and put up billboards of self-congratulation wherever a road project is in progress.
But fear not, the world is changing. Pretty soon we will be able to track the whereabouts of every vehicle whether parked or in motion. More important, lots of those vehicles are going to be self-driving and owned by for-profit fleet operators.
As owners of the highway infrastructure, I’m sure Canadian taxpayers will have no trouble extracting user fees from the multinational corporations employing hordes of driverless vehicles on their roads.
Michael Poulton, Halifax
In addition to fuel taxes and licence fees, there is another significant source of tax revenue derived from products manufactured solely for use on our road systems: those collected from the automotive industry.
Automakers, suppliers and other related businesses pay significant corporate taxes and employ hundreds of thousands of people who pay income taxes.
To suggest that the use of our roads is “free” is ludicrous. Every person, small business or corporation pays a significant amount of money in the form of taxes, one way or another, in order to gain access to our “free” road networks.
John Morrison, Burlington, Ont.
Tolls are regressive and put pressure on alternate non-tolled routes.
Better to reduce the cost of transit (and build more of it) to encourage its use, and pay for transportation out of the progressive tax system.
We are all citizens, not just taxpayers.
Phillip Morris, Mississauga
Every gas station in Canada is a “toll booth,” collecting federal and provincial gas taxes.
Something in excess of $22-billion in fuel taxes is generated annually in Canada. This amount does not even include GST/HST on gas or vehicle purchases, carbon taxes, licence fees for drivers and vehicles, various recycling fees or the gas tax charged by some municipalities.
It does not include the hefty portion of municipal property taxes that go to city expenditures on transit and transportation.
If we want to charge road users more, save us from more toll booths and the congestion, lineups and scramble for coins to feed them. Just raise the rates on the thousands of “toll booths” that are already there.
Andrew Gamble, Ottawa
The premise that drivers should pay tolls to use roads is simply wrong.
All road users pay taxes (i.e. tolls) to support them: vehicle owners through gas taxes and licence fees, and others through income and sales taxes.
It’s not just individual car drivers who benefit from “free” roads. Anyone who depends directly or indirectly on trucks, buses, motorcycles, bicycles and, yes, cars is a beneficiary. That covers pretty much everyone in society.
Why put a toll on just some road users for infrastructure that benefits all?
Ron Freedman, Toronto
We can learn from the “congestion tax” levied in London several years ago.
Instead of charging vehicles that were travelling across the city or out of the city, the British municipality imposed a tax on vehicles entering the downtown area (with exemptions for people who lived there). This measure reduced traffic gridlock in the city, encouraged more use of public transport and resulted in less pollution.
Something for us to try?
Lawrence Englander, Toronto
Keep your Opinions sharp and informed. Get the Opinion newsletter. Sign up today.