In response to Bernard Drainville’s call for greater private-sector involvement in public transit, we need to remember that the private sector is already omnipresent and, far from saving money, this model has actually reduced the quality of service in the Quebec network. As gas prices rise, CUPE is calling for economical transportation alternatives, so everyone can benefit from an efficient public transit network.
Elsewhere, full privatization of public transit has deteriorated service
The example of Great Britain speaks for itself. When the bus network was privatized, fares increased, ridership plummeted and service became choppy and unreliable, despite private operators receiving substantial public subsidies. The companies’ profits increased, but, since the money was not reinvested in the network, the quality of service failed to keep pace.
“The UK already did this merry-go-round,” said Dominic Aubry, coordinator for the CUPE ground transportation sector. “It was an abysmal failure. In the 2000s and 2010s, London, Manchester and other cities had to take back control of their bus networks to clean up the fallout of this failed private model. Let’s learn from their mistakes.”
RCGT vs. IRIS: analytical blind spots
The RCGT audit that Drainville mentioned focuses mainly on cost and advocates increased contracting out. However, its analysis overlooks service quality, even though it is crucial to users. A recent IRIS study showed that Quebec’s only fully private transit company has the worst record for on-time performance, breakdowns and complaints, directly disproving the hypothesis that increased reliance on the private sector would improve service delivery.
The private sector is already well established… and unionized!
There are 10 public transit companies in addition to the ARTM in Quebec, which were the focus of the government’s 2024 audit. One of them, Exo, contracts out 100% of its activities to the private sector. Although the audit presents it as a model, Exo has not improved service reliability. Also, several of its branches are unionized: its workers took this route even though the company is privately owned. Obviously, one model does not exclude the other.
Even worse, the major private operators on the north and south shores of Montréal, including Keolis and Transdev, are international subsidiaries. This means that a portion of the public funds invested in their contracts leaves Quebec as dividends, instead of being reinvested in improving user services.
The solution is simple
CUPE reiterates that reliable, frequent and affordable public transit requires adequate funding. Therefore, service quality—not accounting that only looks like savings on paper—should be the focus. After all, better service will attract more users, especially when transit is becoming all the more crucial as gas prices skyrocket.
“It is irresponsible to throw conservative ideas into the public arena and see what sticks in public policy,” concluded Katherine Bouclin, president of the CUPE Conseil provincial du secteur transport terrestre. “As the cost of living rises, public transit is a tangible way to help families save money. But, to do so, it has to be a priority.”
The need for action on public transit in Quebec is urgent. CUPE is expecting another report, which it commissioned from the HEC, in the next few days. In particular, it will shed light on the blind spots of the RCGT audit.