Governments must help take the wheel from Greyhound

If you own a car or live in a city with public transit, the decision by Greyhound to stop running buses in almost all of Canada west of Sudbury probably won’t keep you up at night.

But if you don’t own your own vehicle or drive and happen to live in a small community in this vast expanse of our country, it might seem as if the sky just fell in. How are you going to get around?

Blaming a 41 per cent drop in ridership nationwide since 2010, Greyhound dropped its bombshell announcement of massive route cutbacks last week, leaving thousands of Canadians who depend on the service to pick up the pieces.

As of Oct. 31, the company — which has been connecting Canadian communities since 1929 — will run no buses in northwestern Ontario, no buses in Manitoba, Saskatchewan or Alberta and, save for a single route between Vancouver and Seattle, no buses in British Columbia.

There’s nothing positive to be taken from this decision except, perhaps, for the three months it gives the federal, provincial and municipal governments to help find alternative transportation for seniors, students, low-income residents and many Indigenous people in the affected communities.

And there should be no doubt that these governments must step up and do their part.

The private sector — unaided — is clearly unable to provide a vital service in rural Canada. Our governments have a role to play in ensuring this need is met.

Until now, Greyhound buses have been a lifeline for thousands of Canadians in small communities, taking them to medical and business appointments, jobs, job interviews and schools. For many Indigenous communities, buses are the only alternative to hitchhiking, an often dangerous means of transportation that has factored in the disappearances and deaths of far too many First Nations women and girls.

The end of Greyhound service will leave a gaping hole in these small communities.

In some instances, private-sector bus companies will start filling in the service gaps, and this already seems to be happening in part of northwestern Ontario.

But Greyhound is cutting services because they carry too few people for the company to make money. It will be necessary for governments to support private companies where possible and, in some cases at least, to run entire bus routes by themselves.

It’s nothing new for tax dollars to cover special costs in rural and isolated parts of Canada. Postal delivery, health care and education are more expensive and less cost-efficient when they have to be delivered to smaller populations separated by great distances from big cities. Moreover, governments already subsidize public transportation for city dwellers. All this argues for governments to accept more responsibility for rural bus travel.

It may, in fact, be possible for provincial or municipal governments to step in and keep at least some bus routes running. British Columbia and Alberta have already started doing this in a few areas.

But they’ll face challenges. Saskatchewan’s provincial government got into the busing business then abandoned it because it cost so much to move relatively few people.

A little creativity is in order. Is some kind of subsidized car-share system possible in some communities, where people could drive or ride as a passenger in a vehicle largely paid for by a government? Should governments pay for services by smaller vans to meet more limited needs?

Talk is good. Action’s better. Governments helped railways bind Canada together in the 19th century. They can help buses do the same in the 21st.