A6 - Wednesday, December 14, 1983 - North Shore News

EE editorial page

Bowen fares

If ever there was a ‘‘special case’’ crying for
reconsideration, it’s the ferry fare increases
imposed on Bowen Island residents as part of
last week’s overall B.C. Ferry fare hikes.

While Mainland-Vancouver Island fares
went up by between 6% and 8%, return fares
between Bowen and Horseshoe Bay have
jumped 48% (from $7.45 to $11) for a car and
driver, and 122% (from $1.35 te $3) for foot
passengers.

The Bowen situation is entirely different
from the Mainiland-Island and Gulf Islands
routes (the latter hiked by 30%). Bowen’s per-
manent population has risen by 300% over the
past decade. At least a quarter of its 1,200
residents commute daily to the Mainland. The
island is no longer just a summer retreat. It
has become a Vancouver bedroom community
like Lions Bay or Whytecliff.

Under the new tariff, car drivers crossing to
and fro daily face a minumum extra bill of
more than $700 a year — and commuters on
foot a minimum of around $230. If the
15-minute trip across Howe Sound were, in-
stead, a 15-minute bus ride on dry land,
fare hikes on this scale would, of course, be
politically unthinkable.

Admittedly, general fare increases are need-
ed to help reduce the ferry system’s $36
million loss last year. But the additional
revenue from crucifying some 300 Bowen
commuters, while other ferry users escape
much more lightly, would hardly scratch the
surface of that deficit.

Fare hikes for permanent Bowen residents
should not exceed the percentage of the main

’ fleet. If .6%-8% extra is enough from
Horseshoe Bay to Nanaimo, it’s more than
enough from the Bay to Snug Cove.

Close to home

When times are tough, they say, charity
begins at home. You can’t get much closer
to home this month than the North Van

Christmas Bureau (985-8612) and the West
Van Santa Claus Fund (922-6522), which are
‘gearing to provide food hampers, toys and
clothing for 1,000 or more of our needy North
Shore neighbors and their children. Call them
to check their most urgent needs. Then give
generously - and so close to home.

VUE VOCE OF WORTH ATED WEST WARTOUwER

sunday

Olsplay Advertising 980-0511

news Classified Advertising 986-6222
north shore Newsroom 985-2131
rn ews Circulation 986-1337
Subscriptions 980-7081

1139 Lonsdate Ave., North Vancouver, B.C V7M 2H4
Publisher Peter Speck

Editor-in-Chiet
Noe! Wright

Associate Publisher

Advertising Director
Robert Graham :

Tom f ras ts
Personnel Director
Bernt Wilkard

Production Director
Chris Johnson

Classified Director
tsabelte Jennings

Circulation Oirector
Bat Mc Gaowr:

Ottice Manager
Donna Grandy

Photography Managor

Tetty Peters

North Shore News, founded in 1900 as an iINdapendent community
Newupape: and qualified under Schadute Wl Pac Wl Paragraph Uh Ol the
tacese Tae Act ts QKublished aach Wednesday aod Sunday Dy Nott
Stare trae Praga Cid) and distubuled to every door oF the Nort: Shore
Second (less Mad Regiitraton Numboec 1865 Entire contents — 1083

North Ghore Free Prees (td All rights reserved

Subecniptions North and Weal Vane cniver
avatabie on

ber

grere yen Maden ater

request

No erg rcorusttoudefy ae co ampterd) tao atv tarts shed
MAMIE HOS and Ore tienen whe Fe abate) bee ane

adresse envelope

mber of the B.C. Press Council

Ld
AOA DIC

nvalere ae seve bathe gy

a Cort apraried Cry a lear tip eed

64,700 (average Wednesday & bunday:

THIS PAPER IS RECYCLABLE

MAINSTREAM CANADA -

Jobs for all a realistic goal

IN THIS DECADE of recession, economic experts
armed with doom and gloom _ scenarios on
Canada’s future are more abundant than the anti
nuclear demonstrators who seem to believe there
are some Canadians who actually favor a nuclear

War.

Some noted economists
argue that unemployment
will remain at more than 10

per cent for the next decade.
Others contend that the stan-
dard of living for Canadians

.

By W. ROGER WORTH

will drop substantially, and a
few are even forecasting we'll
have the worst of two worlds,
with both unemployment and
inflation at
levels.

_In the midst of all this
Negativism about Canada’s
future, the Canadian Federa-
tion of Independent Business
recently made a_ startling
presentation to the Mac-
donald Commission on: the
Economy that surely
qualifies as an early
Christmas gift to the Cana-
dian public.

The thrust of the presenta-
tion: full employment, with
all its benefits, can be a reali-
ty by 1990..- .

“‘Sure we seem out of step
with most of the country’s
leading economic
forecasters,’’ says Federation
President John Bulloch.
“*But we honestly believe,

_ based on comprehensive

economic studies, that full
employment can be
achieved.”’

But, as might be expected,
Bulloch’s optimistic outlook
will not become a reality
unless some - fundamental
changes are made.

The Federation says a ma-
jor redirection of resources is
necessary: from consumption
to development; from the
public (government) to the
private sector; from tradi-
tional industries like textiles
to knowledge-intensive in-

double-digit ©

dustries such as micro-elec-
tronics, lasers and _ biotech-
nologies.

“‘Canadians must be
assured there is a future, and
that they will have a part of
it,’’ says Bulloch.

The major difference bet-
ween the Federation’s
outlook and other forecasts is
the emphasis the organiza-
tion representing 64,000
small and medium-sized
Canadian enterprises places
on job creation among in-
dependent firms.

‘“We’ve already proven
that small and medium-sized
enterprises produced al/ of
Canada’s net new jobs bet-
ween 1975 and 1982, and
that’s something many of the
experts have failed to
realize,’’ says Bulloch.
‘“‘What’s more, ai/ the net
new job creation between
now and 1990 will come from
smaller, independent firms.’’

So there’s little wonder the
Federation is upgrading its
already significant efforts to
impress governments, politi-
cians and bureaucrats, as well
as the public, that roadblocks
Standing in the way of
smaller firms must be
removed.

*‘It may sound pompous,
but nothing less than a na-
tional consensus on the
crucial need to support in-
dependent firms is required,’’
says Bulloch. ‘‘Smal]
businesses are the key to
creating full employment,
and we now have the facts to
back that claim.’’

CFIB Feature Service

The right to a roof?

AFFORDABLE RENTAL HOUSING: should it
be a right, not just a privilege, for all who need it in
our affluent industrial society? Guaranteed by the
state like medicare, education and welfare?

That’s what the question is
beginning to boil down to,
following the abolition of
rent control and the resultant
tide of tenant protests against
‘*excessive’’ rent increases.

Typical North Shore cases
include the woman on a fixed
income, sole supporter of a
family of three, who gets a
13.5 per cemt rent hike from
$450 to $510 per month. The
only way to find the extra $60
is to do without a week's
food shopping

Or the old age pensioner
and his wife, hit with a:25 per
cent raise from $400 to $500.
They, too, face going
hungry

The only pracucal alter-
native for such lower-income
tenants 1s to leave their com-
munity and head for Hope or
the Interior In the = price
range they can afford, the
rental vacancy today tn the
lower Mainland 1s virtually
revo

Moreover, if nature ~
meaning, in this case, the
market place is left to take
us course, that’s the way
things are going to remain.
And don't try to blame st all
on the rapacious landlords

NO NET INCOME
tUs common knowledge
that, under rent control, aot
nearly cnough new rental ac.
commodation has been built
inrecent years ft hasn't been

built because inflated con-
struction costs and high in-
terest rates have made the
provision of new units to rent
in the $300-$400 range a
moncy-losing proposition.
By no means are all land-
lords in the Zen and Aquilini
category. Under rent control
a good many smaller land-
lords earned no net income at
all from their lower-income
tenants. . .

After meeting mortgage tn-
stalments, taxes, upkeep and
repairs they counted them
selves lucky if the property
merely paid for ttself. More
than a few = actually lost
moncy — which now, freed
from rent control, they are
not unnaturally trying to
recoup.

With the restoration of the
‘free market’’, the conven
tional wisdom preached by
Dr. Michael Walker and his
Fraser Institute is that all will
soon be well.

The building of new rental
units will boom because land
tords will be assured of a
return on theie investment
The vancancy rate will risc.
giving tenants many more op
tions. Competition will
thrive, giving (hem more pro.
tectton against being gouged
Everyone will be happy.

Everyone, that 18, except
the very people we were talk

ing about today’s fixed and |

by
Noel Wright

lower-income tenants who
are already scraping the bot-
tom of the barrel to find $400
or so a month for an ade-
quate roof over their heads.

POVERTY, NOT RENTS

Even if. there were no
unscrupulous landlords at
all, the harsh economic truth
of the matter today is that the
cost of producing and main-
taining satisfactory rental ac-
commodation in most parts
of the Lower Mainland is
more thun the majority of
such tenants can afford. *

The good Dr. Walker is
perfectly right in one state-
ment; the problem isn’t rents,
it's poverty So where do we

go from there?

Either nowhere (let the
unlucky ones pack their few
sticks and head for a shack in
Skagit Valley). Or back to the
taxpayer for government help
to lower-income tenants who
qualify under a means test.

Along that path lie several
options.

One is more government.
subsidized housing. Lt can
give some developers an un-
fair advantage over others and
it’s also open to abuse — as
the current boondoggle over
co-op housing has shown.

Another is for the govern.
ment to get into the building
business itself — with the risk
of barrack-like eyesores of
the type plentiful in the
suburbs of Moscow tn order
to hold down costs.

Yet another (and probably
the best): a direct income
supplement to needy in
dividuals in order to bridge
the gap between what they
can afford and private sector
tents

Whichever
it, the taxpayer
becomes, once morc,
brother's keeper

Like the poor, the Zen's
and the Aquilini’s will always
be with us But in the overall
crunch squeezing lower
income tenants there are few
real villains. The main
“‘villain’’ ts simply the kind
of economy we have chosen
— and which, by and Jargc.
works better than most

If you've any other solu
tions, a lot of centers and
landlords alike will be glad to
hear from you

shoe
then
has

way you