That is a very good question. My thinking is if they vote like me, one item isn't going to push them one way or the other. It is a combination.
At the very least, you ought to be able to explain how it fits into initiatives that Ottawa and the Provinces have agreed on.
I would much rather they find new sources of funding, but phrasing that in any shape or form would be a death blow
This is a bigger issue that you can’t sidestep. MP’s have to fight very hard to get even small amounts of money directed to their riding. They won’t be impressed by a suggestion that hey, you must be able to find some money in a drawer somewhere. I would research what infrastructure money is being offered in the various programs - there are enough of those - and argue that your ideas are legitimately within scope for these so the funding may be achievable.
.The impact is that they would need to fit in another train per day each way. Mitigating that? Likely the only thing is money for longer sidings or double track. So, it could be seen as a way to move goods faster.
Longer sidings and double track is serious coin, and if the railways needed it they would already have bought it. Even if it is gifted to them, they will not maintain double track they don’t need - that eats at revenue.
You may not appreciate just what it means to add a passenger train to a single track line. It’s like a game of musical chairs when the music stops - launch just one fast train out of Edmonton, and every train on the line needs a siding to duck into at virtually the same time - a two or three hour trip time is pretty close to a single event..
Alao, some of the lines where we remember passenger have been downgraded, if they are still there at all. Point is, you need to show you appreciate just how costly this will be, and have a reason why that will deliver a. Commensurate value to the country.
That is a reasonably easy answer. Toronto, Winnipeg and Vancouver for both the CN and CP Canadian routes. Edmonton or Calgary for the service between them.(new jobs in those areas could sway some voters) And for the east, Montreal and Halifax.
You might get traction on the Maritimes.
Good luck explaining how the Alberta and Saskatchewan premiers can be soothed by a passenger train when their constituents are fighting to retain a petro based economy or replace it with better.
As for the Canadian daily on any route - that would require a massive equipment investment. For a train that only carries tourists. There is no hope of transforming long distance trains (that carry fewer people than a single airbus) into a valued component of long distance travel when even a sold-out daily train running Vancouver to Toronto (with all passengers buying a fare for the whole way) takes only one slot at YYZ and YVR - with no benefit to intermediate stations.
The risk of making this argument is that you will sound like you are making a case out of nostalgia and not presenting a.value proposition for the future. The last thing MP’s need to hear is a plea to bring back the Cannonball - it makes us all look like romantics and not people with serious ideas. Long distance trains don't so,ve anybody's problem.
I would stick with corridors where there may be potential for significant market share vs air and auto.
This one is my Achilles heel. I do talk to people, but I am 'just a voter'.
Well, you stull have time to talk to someone
There is strength in numbers.
Good luck, it’s a big ask.
- Paul
