Porter Airlines crosses the border
A good week for Porter, a bad one for Air Canada. Its Jazz subsidiary was denied summary judgement in their attempt to regain access to Toronto City Centre and must issue a formal statement of claim within 30 days and submit to discovery processes (which would disclose Jazz' strategy towards the Island Airport). Failure to do so would mean they would be exposed to costs - Porter claim to have spend $1m so far.
This was followed by the US Department of Transportation decision to allow Porter to operate to the US. This was opposed by Air Canada and some US airlines but DOT decided that what the Port Authority did to Air Canada was not their concern, and all that mattered was their relationship with American carriers - noting that TPA came to an agreement with US Airways, irrespective that US did not take up the service.
Porter is expected to begin service to Newark in Q4 2007 or Q1 2008 but are expected to serve other US destinations. CEO Robert Deluce had recently announced plans to finance the purchase of the next six aircraft in their firm order with Bombardier. Personally I'm hoping he names one of them "John Barber".
This was followed by the US Department of Transportation decision to allow Porter to operate to the US. This was opposed by Air Canada and some US airlines but DOT decided that what the Port Authority did to Air Canada was not their concern, and all that mattered was their relationship with American carriers - noting that TPA came to an agreement with US Airways, irrespective that US did not take up the service.
Porter is expected to begin service to Newark in Q4 2007 or Q1 2008 but are expected to serve other US destinations. CEO Robert Deluce had recently announced plans to finance the purchase of the next six aircraft in their firm order with Bombardier. Personally I'm hoping he names one of them "John Barber".
Comments
Torontonians will pay the environmental consequences of this airline for years to come to allow a relatively few people to take short haul flights- flights which Europe has banned as environmentally destructive, as the per capita emissions are greater than any other mode of transport.
Taking your arguments in turn:
"You forgot to mention that Porter Airlines is flying out of the centre of a densely populated city"
Actually it's flying from the edge of a large city, given that roughly 50% of the circular area surrounding Toronto Island Airport is Lake Ontario.
"which voted against its expansion for reasons of air and noise pollution"
John Tory, Barbara Hall and John Nunziata supported the airport and won more than 50% of the vote. (363,000 vs Hizzoner's 300,000) David Miller won because the City of Toronto uses first past the post. No direct referendum on the use of the island airport has ever been held.
"In this age of global warming, and in a city which already has very bad air pollution"
Porter's turboprops are highly fuel efficient compared to the turbofans employed by Air Canada and Westjet. Obviously high speed rail would be more environmentally friendly, especially if powered by solar, wind, hydro or nuclear generated electricity, but that is not an alternative available to Torontonians, or at least not yet.
"this airline has been allowed to operate despite the wishes of the majority of the Torontonians. "
I refer your assertion to my answer above.
"Torontonians will pay the environmental consequences of this airline for years to come to allow a relatively few people to take short haul flights- flights which Europe has banned as environmentally destructive"
Absolute rubbish. "Europe" (presumably "the European Union" although one does not equal the other) has done no such thing and I defy you to produce evidence - especially since the exact same aircraft as Porter's is being used by Flybe and Luxair to operate from the centre of a much larger city than Toronto, and from a catchment with a lot less water around it!
How absurd- pollution is pollution, whether air or water- and whether the planes are fuel efficient or not is a moot point as well- they are still flying, and still polluting the waterfront. Land or water, CO2 and NO2 are toxic.
Torontonians did vote against the bridge to Island Airport to show their concern about its use of parklands as an airfield, and the use of our tax money to fund a privately owned company.