Discuss Detroit » Archives - Beginning January 2007 » Bridge owner says new law gives Canada too much power « Previous Next »
Top of pageBottom of page

Dougw
Member
Username: Dougw

Post Number: 1553
Registered: 11-2003
Posted on Wednesday, February 14, 2007 - 11:40 pm:   Edit PostDelete Post   Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only)

http://crainsdetroit.com/apps/ pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20070212 /SUB/702090303

excerpt from Crain's:
quote:

Border tension
Bridge owner says new law gives Canada too much power

By Andrew Dietderich
6:00 am, February 12, 2007

A new law that the owner of the Ambassador Bridge calls “a loaded gun” gives the Canadian government more control over private bridges and tunnels and has the company that owns the bridge unsure if it will be able to retain its dominant position at the busy Detroit-Windsor border.

Canada's Bill C-3, the International Bridges and Tunnels Act, passed Jan. 29. Canadian officials said the law aims to make the border safer. (See box, Page 23.)

Many specific guidelines and regulations of the law remain to be determined.

But Dan Stamper, president of the Detroit International Bridge Co., said Bill C-3 effectively gives a potential competitor — the Canadian government — more control over the Ambassador Bridge, creating a conflict of interest.

“What we are worried about with Bill C-3 ... is that it gives the Minister of Transport the authority to say, "Ambassador Bridge, we are going to put a ceiling on your business,' ” Matthew Moroun, son of bridge owner Manuel Moroun, said in testimony before a Canadian Senate committee, according to a transcript given to Crain's by the bridge company.

“ "We are going to cap your growth and decide that we are not going to allow you to build a new span across the river; your future is over. Instead, we are going to authorize a new span across the river less than a mile away that we control as Transport Canada, your brand-new competitor — nice to meet you.' ”

...

The Detroit International Bridge Co. said it has spent $500 million already preparing for the new bridge, buying land and engineering the structure, among other things. The company has said it expects to spend another $500 million completing the project.

Competitors of the bridge company said they have no problems with Bill C-3.

Marge Byington, director of government relations for the U.S. side of the Detroit River Tunnel Partnership, said her organization supports the law because of the improved security measures. ...

Top of pageBottom of page

Jams
Member
Username: Jams

Post Number: 4760
Registered: 10-2003
Posted on Thursday, February 15, 2007 - 12:00 am:   Edit PostDelete Post   Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only)

Ahhhh Poor Matty!!

Damn Government making it hard for a billionaire.
Top of pageBottom of page

Lmichigan
Member
Username: Lmichigan

Post Number: 5121
Registered: 10-2003
Posted on Thursday, February 15, 2007 - 12:12 am:   Edit PostDelete Post   Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only)

That was my first thought, too, Jams. lol It's hard out there for a pimp. :-)
Top of pageBottom of page

Korridorkid
Member
Username: Korridorkid

Post Number: 19
Registered: 01-2005
Posted on Thursday, February 15, 2007 - 1:00 am:   Edit PostDelete Post   Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only)

Cry me a river to build another bridge over, Maroun.

Wait, you would like that.

Toss it.
Top of pageBottom of page

Barnesfoto
Member
Username: Barnesfoto

Post Number: 3035
Registered: 10-2003
Posted on Thursday, February 15, 2007 - 1:48 am:   Edit PostDelete Post   Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only)

Why, the NERVE of the government of a country of 32,248 thinking that they are more important that then one putrid old vampire...
Top of pageBottom of page

Eric
Member
Username: Eric

Post Number: 687
Registered: 11-2004
Posted on Thursday, February 15, 2007 - 1:53 am:   Edit PostDelete Post   Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only)

Wow. This is so very unfair to Matty the unmitigated gall of the government to think they should regulate and have oversight over an international border crossing.



(Message edited by eric on February 15, 2007)
Top of pageBottom of page

Lmichigan
Member
Username: Lmichigan

Post Number: 5125
Registered: 10-2003
Posted on Thursday, February 15, 2007 - 6:12 am:   Edit PostDelete Post   Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only)

Looks like the son is just as greedy and uncomprimising as his old man, unfortunately for Detroit. If they could wipe out Mexicantown, they most certainly would.

(Message edited by lmichigan on February 15, 2007)
Top of pageBottom of page

Detroitbill
Member
Username: Detroitbill

Post Number: 155
Registered: 09-2006
Posted on Thursday, February 15, 2007 - 8:43 am:   Edit PostDelete Post   Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only)

If you know anything of the company, and I certainly do through my job,, Matty Maroun cares about one thing,, himself and making more money and believe me they will do anything , manipulate anybody and misrepresent situations to satisfy their needs.
Top of pageBottom of page

Aiw
Member
Username: Aiw

Post Number: 6165
Registered: 10-2003
Posted on Thursday, February 15, 2007 - 10:01 am:   Edit PostDelete Post   Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only)

For those of you interested, this is the new law:

http://www.parl.gc.ca/common/b ills_ls.asp?lang=E&ls=c3&sourc e=library_prb&Parl=39&Ses=1

quote:

The construction and alteration of international bridges and tunnels are matters falling within federal legislative competence pursuant to sections 91(29) and 92(10)(a) of the Constitution Act, 1867. Nevertheless, Transport Canada officials point out that few Canadian laws of general application to international bridges and tunnels have been adopted and no clear authority currently exists to regulate matters pertaining to international bridges and tunnels. Such matters include: the approval of the construction or alteration of new and existing bridges or tunnels; the approval of changes in their ownership, operation or control; and issues of maintenance, operation, safety and security. Officials note that there is currently no defined approval process in Canada for the construction of a new international bridge or tunnel or the alteration of an existing one. They point out that many of those bridges and tunnels were originally created by Special Acts of Parliament, with mirror legislation being enacted in the United States. However, they note that the United States has since streamlined its approval process by requiring persons wishing to construct a new international bridge or tunnel or alter an existing one to apply for a Presidential Permit. Bill C-3 proposes that a person wishing to construct a new international bridge or tunnel or alter an existing one must apply for Governor in Council approval, and meet certain guidelines or terms and conditions.



quote:

The highlights of the bill are that it:

> confirms the federal government’s exclusive jurisdiction over international bridges and tunnels;

> requires Governor in Council approval for the construction or alteration of an international bridge or tunnel;

> requires Governor in Council approval for purchasing, operating, or acquiring control of an entity that owns or operates an international bridge or tunnel;

> empowers the Minister to order the owner or operator of an international bridge or tunnel to take any action that the Minister considers appropriate to ensure that it is kept in good condition;

> authorizes the Governor in Council to make regulations regarding the maintenance and repair, operation and use, and security and safety of international bridges and tunnels;
empowers the Minister to make emergency directions in cases of immediate threats to the security or safety of an international bridge or tunnel;

and

> establishes a system of administrative monetary penalties for designated infractions of the proposed legislation.



I wonder why so many references to maintenance were included? :-)

As anyone who knows anything the group of families owned by Centra, maintenance is very low on the priority list.
Top of pageBottom of page

Nainrouge
Member
Username: Nainrouge

Post Number: 146
Registered: 05-2006
Posted on Thursday, February 15, 2007 - 11:00 am:   Edit PostDelete Post   Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only)

I hate the idea of eminent domain, but wouldn't this be a case where it is justified (taking the bridge)? After all, this is a issue of national security.
Top of pageBottom of page

Homer
Member
Username: Homer

Post Number: 81
Registered: 08-2004
Posted on Thursday, February 15, 2007 - 11:15 am:   Edit PostDelete Post   Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only)

Kwame and his Momma are so deep into Matty's pockets eminent domain is unlikely, but I would love to see it happen.
Top of pageBottom of page

Vas
Member
Username: Vas

Post Number: 667
Registered: 01-2004
Posted on Thursday, February 15, 2007 - 11:20 am:   Edit PostDelete Post   Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only)

"Your brand new competitor-nice to meet you."

Whats wrong Moroun? You don't want competition?

We're talking about a border with another country, yeah they get a say in the transportation.

By the way, Mr. Marou, what have you done for Detroit besides reap profits from your bridge? Does anyone know of any altruism from this multi-millionaire?
Top of pageBottom of page

Zephyrprocess
Member
Username: Zephyrprocess

Post Number: 246
Registered: 08-2006
Posted on Thursday, February 15, 2007 - 11:45 am:   Edit PostDelete Post   Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only)

quote:

Matty Maroun cares about one thing,, himself and making more money



Get it straight, Detroitbill!


...that's two things
Top of pageBottom of page

Lowell
Board Administrator
Username: Lowell

Post Number: 3673
Registered: 10-2003
Posted on Thursday, February 15, 2007 - 12:17 pm:   Edit PostDelete Post   Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only)

Boo hoo hoo

Good for the Canadian Parliament for trying to break this monopoly that is so crucial to our international metropolitan economy.

Good for Windsor West's MP Brian Masse too.
quote:

“There's a lot more general interest in making sure all bridges and tunnels are safe and secure rather than protecting someone's personal profits,” Brian Masse, a member of Canadian Parliament who represents Windsor West, told Crain's Thursday. “This harmonizes all border crossings outright. It's about greater security, accountability and uniformity.”

[Translation: "Up yours Centra."]

Maroun and company will remain unsympathetic slumlords in the eyes of many on the north shore as long as they let their Michigan Central Depot lay in ruins, among other things.
Top of pageBottom of page

Dougw
Member
Username: Dougw

Post Number: 1554
Registered: 11-2003
Posted on Thursday, February 15, 2007 - 1:42 pm:   Edit PostDelete Post   Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only)

What, no defenders of Maroun on this thread? :-)

As far as taking the Ambassador Bridge from Centra (via eminent domain or whatever process), I'd say that's not as necessary as long as the new bridge is built and controlled by a different party, providing real competition.
Top of pageBottom of page

Eastside_charlie
Member
Username: Eastside_charlie

Post Number: 19
Registered: 02-2007
Posted on Saturday, February 17, 2007 - 7:14 pm:   Edit PostDelete Post   Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only)

Let's see, someone purchased a bridge and is charging to cross it. It is called capitalism.
Now a Government entity wants to control the bridge (property) and dictate every aspect of it.
No one is stopping Canada/ Michigan from building another bridge/tunnel, they just want to oppress the opposition.
It has nothing to do with safety. Our government lets in millions of illegal alien crooks every year, and they let's them stay.
I could care less of how much money this leech makes or loses.
I guess most people on this site do not like capitalism.
Top of pageBottom of page

Ventura67
Member
Username: Ventura67

Post Number: 106
Registered: 12-2003
Posted on Saturday, February 17, 2007 - 7:25 pm:   Edit PostDelete Post   Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only)

Capitalism is not the problem, but clearly something like the Ambassador is used by and depended on by hundreds of thousands of people and thousands of businesses between two peaceful (generally), friendly, and great countries. Not the type of thing that should be owned, maintained or secured by one private company.

I commend Canadians for taking a stand on this.

Now if only we'd take a stand on their garbage coming over said bridge!

(Message edited by ventura67 on February 17, 2007)
Top of pageBottom of page

Jams
Member
Username: Jams

Post Number: 4789
Registered: 10-2003
Posted on Saturday, February 17, 2007 - 7:42 pm:   Edit PostDelete Post   Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only)

If you admire the 19th century robber barons, you'll love the Morouns.
Top of pageBottom of page

Eric
Member
Username: Eric

Post Number: 688
Registered: 11-2004
Posted on Saturday, February 17, 2007 - 7:52 pm:   Edit PostDelete Post   Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only)

Eastside_charlie it has everything to do with our safety. This scumbag doesn't allow the government to inspect the bridge and violates federal law on hazardous materials all under the guise of capitalism. Did you miss AIW's post on how much of this bill refers to maintenance? Did you the both governments might have an interest in making sure that most link US and Canada is well taken care of?

quote:

> empowers the Minister to order the owner or operator of an international bridge or tunnel to take any action that the Minister considers appropriate to ensure that it is kept in good condition;

> authorizes the Governor in Council to make regulations regarding the maintenance and repair, operation and use, and security and safety of international bridges and tunnels;



I think you need to read up on some Maroun's business practices

http://www.forbes.com/business /free_forbes/2004/1115/134.htm l
Top of pageBottom of page

Eastside_charlie
Member
Username: Eastside_charlie

Post Number: 20
Registered: 02-2007
Posted on Saturday, February 17, 2007 - 8:56 pm:   Edit PostDelete Post   Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only)

Forbes usually is against government regulation, they have an agenda. Again, Let the US/Canada build a bridge and compete.
No one is forced to pay his tolls.
Why didn't all the brilliant economists, planners that graduated from our fine institutions build a bridge long ago?? It could have been paid for by now and probably would have put Maroun out of business. SOUR GRAPES.
http://www.todaystrucking.com/ newscenter.cfm?pageaction=stor y&intNewsCenterID=3&intDocID=1 6762&CFID=934&CFTOKEN=6766185
The City's Department of Buildings and Safety Engineering originally denied the bridge permission to construct new passenger and truck tollbooths and to expand the plaza. A circuit court sided with the bridge company, agreeing that the plaza is "maintained under contract with the federal government for the essential governmental purposes of conducting customs, naturalization and border control functions."

I think it is our Governments trying to capitalize on a unique asset, that was PRIVATELY financed.
Long Live Capitalism.
Top of pageBottom of page

Jams
Member
Username: Jams

Post Number: 4794
Registered: 10-2003
Posted on Saturday, February 17, 2007 - 9:26 pm:   Edit PostDelete Post   Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only)

quote:

No one is forced to pay his tolls.



Options?
Top of pageBottom of page

Detroit_stylin
Member
Username: Detroit_stylin

Post Number: 3836
Registered: 10-2003
Posted on Saturday, February 17, 2007 - 10:17 pm:   Edit PostDelete Post   Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only)

Detroit/Windsor Tunnel...

...or if you are a strong enough swimmer...
Top of pageBottom of page

Psip
Member
Username: Psip

Post Number: 1399
Registered: 04-2005
Posted on Saturday, February 17, 2007 - 10:51 pm:   Edit PostDelete Post   Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only)

you could take the ferry as an option

http://www.truckferry.com/
Top of pageBottom of page

Lmichigan
Member
Username: Lmichigan

Post Number: 5132
Registered: 10-2003
Posted on Sunday, February 18, 2007 - 1:09 am:   Edit PostDelete Post   Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only)

Jams has made a great, great point.
Top of pageBottom of page

Smogboy
Member
Username: Smogboy

Post Number: 4502
Registered: 11-2004
Posted on Sunday, February 18, 2007 - 4:19 am:   Edit PostDelete Post   Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only)

For those of who who've traveled back across the US/ Canadian border at other points- have you ever compared prices to what we pay here? The Detroit/ Windsor crossing is the MOST EXPENSIVE toll along the entire stretch of border!

And I don't have a problem with capitalism but there's also something to be said for the Maroun monopoly at this point too. Ideally he'd only own either the tunnel OR the bridge and not both. As it is now, there is no competition. We're all held hostage to their demands. I'd be willing to bet that if an alternate crossing were to be built and a less expensive fare was charged at this new crossing- the tolls at the bridge & tunnel would also drop without any sacrifice to maintenance or service.
Top of pageBottom of page

Ray
Member
Username: Ray

Post Number: 853
Registered: 06-2004
Posted on Sunday, February 18, 2007 - 7:29 pm:   Edit PostDelete Post   Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only)

I hope the Canadian government smashes Moroun's balls to pulp. To call him Moroun a criminal is an insult to hardworking felons everywhere.
Top of pageBottom of page

Jams
Member
Username: Jams

Post Number: 4809
Registered: 10-2003
Posted on Sunday, February 18, 2007 - 7:41 pm:   Edit PostDelete Post   Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only)

quote:

...without any sacrifice to maintenance or service.



Assuming that actually happens.
Top of pageBottom of page

Barnesfoto
Member
Username: Barnesfoto

Post Number: 3053
Registered: 10-2003
Posted on Monday, February 19, 2007 - 10:37 am:   Edit PostDelete Post   Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only)

It always amuses me when some uninformed person rushes to defend a guy like Maroun.You'd think, from Eastside's posts, that Maroun had pioneered the concept of border crossing, and built the bridge himself, over many years, with funds saved from his childhood paper route, while us foaming at the mouth socialist-types were marching outside the gates hoping to snatch or regulate away his life's work.

Most of us are required to maintain our property through local building codes.
When someone as wealthy as Maroun gets to ignore such ordinances (perhaps because of his hefty campaign contributions to the Kilpatricks) and even start construction projects in the area without permits there is a term used;
I believe the term is "Corruption".
Top of pageBottom of page

Aiw
Member
Username: Aiw

Post Number: 6172
Registered: 10-2003
Posted on Monday, February 19, 2007 - 12:58 pm:   Edit PostDelete Post   Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only)

Windsor recently passed an interim control bylaw effectivly stopping his plaza expansion mid-stream.

He's trying to turn Windsor's westside into a mirror image of the wasteland he created in SW Detroit.

Add Your Message Here
Posting is currently disabled in this topic. Contact your discussion moderator for more information.