Quebec-Windsor Corridor

[Urban Sky]

glad finally there is an acknowledgement that we are far to behind the rest of the world. now to put action to words.

I would say this quote certainly leans toward an emphasis on full HSR:

View attachment 542043

The decision of what gets built is made by those who are supposed to pay the tab, not those who pitch the project and that’s why I find it so irresponsible to not have retained a smallest-viable-project offering like the initial HFR proposal as third scenario. The chance of the entire project falling through at the funding stage is far too real and would make us all fall back once again by another 15-20 years…

 

[crs1026]

One has to think that this is the LPC staking out their election ground.

Not meaning to raise this in the wrong thread, but because it's relevant here.... the question becomes, what are you not funding to raise the extra money for the high end option.... and one answer is likely, we aren't replacing the long distance fleet.

I personally think that putting all this cash down in Ontario-Quebec while not funding things in the rest of the country is not only a poor decision, but more importantly, it's a good way to not get reelected.

- Paul

 

[lenaitch]

The decision of what gets built is made by those who are supposed to pay the tab, not those who pitch the project and that’s why I find it so irresponsible to not have retained a smallest-viable-project offering like the initial HFR proposal as third scenario. The chance of the entire project falling through at the funding stage is far too real and would make us all fall back once again by another 15-20 years…

The government get to float a balloon with plausible deniability. 'We' never promised that.

 

[dowlingm]

I personally think that putting all this cash down in Ontario-Quebec while not funding things in the rest of the country is not only a poor decision, but more importantly, it's a good way to not get reelected.

- Paul

How many Liberal seats, and where, do you think were winnable on the basis of funding the LD replacement?

 

[crs1026]

How many Liberal seats, and where, do you think were winnable on the basis of funding the LD replacement?

None, as this isn't a standalone destiny issue for anyone......but pointing to how all the money is being spent in ON/QC at the expense of jobs in Winnipeg and Vancouver (and Kamloops, Edmonton, Biggar, etc....) may help make some of the western seats that might have been turnable stay in the other camp.

- Paul

 

[dowlingm]

None, as this isn't a standalone destiny issue for anyone......but pointing to how all the money is being spent in ON/QC at the expense of jobs in Winnipeg and Vancouver (and Kamloops, Edmonton, Biggar, etc....) may help make some of the western seats that might have been turnable stay in the other camp.

except the government could choose to fund other things in their communities with the same cash and more direct effect than shovelling cash to Siemens or Alstom or Stadler. I see chat on groups.io about the economic impact of LD rail in these communities but never a consideration of whether those $ warrant a spend of tens or hundreds of millions, especially when the provinces are not lining up to contribute either directly or in funding related works such as stations or track improvements.

I think an LD replacement would be fascinating and obviously would follow the threads, the posts on new sets arriving, the inevitable frustration at a longer than planned commissioning etc. I doesn’t mean that I don’t have real doubts about the wisdom of merely re-fleeting VIA’s existing LD services as is, rather than, for example, reinventing VIA’s non-Corridor network as a series of day trains similar to Jasper-Prince Rupert.

 

[crs1026]

except the government could choose to fund other things in their communities with the same cash and more direct effect than shovelling cash to Siemens or Alstom or Stadler. I see chat on groups.io about the economic impact of LD rail in these communities but never a consideration of whether those $ warrant a spend of tens or hundreds of millions, especially when the provinces are not lining up to contribute either directly or in funding related works such as stations or track improvements.

I think an LD replacement would be fascinating and obviously would follow the threads, the posts on new sets arriving, the inevitable frustration at a longer than planned commissioning etc. I doesn’t mean that I don’t have real doubts about the wisdom of merely re-fleeting VIA’s existing LD services as is, rather than, for example, reinventing VIA’s non-Corridor network as a series of day trains similar to Jasper-Prince Rupert.

I would frame the question as - if Ottawa has enough money for a high-end ON-QC passenger infrastructure, what could be done with the incremental funding needed, supposing Ottawa built a lower cost HFR and spent the increment somewhere else?

I am not saying that the LD fleet replacement is the best use of that incremental money..... actually, I would prefer building initial infrastructure for corridors in Alberta and the Maritimes which is likely equally politically palatable and might benefit the country more.

I do think that there will be backlash if/when it is clear that Ottawa will not fund LD replacement. It doesn't matter if anybody wants or uses the LS service, it is too easily positioned as a takeaway and in truth a lot of jobs would be harmed, so it touches real people. A lot of people will know someone who loses their job as a result.

The premise that Ottawa has enough money to build the high end HSR plus the money to fund equalising commitments to the other regions is what is to my mind ridiculous. Only the current free spending cabinet believes that. There is a limit to the country's pool of capital. Personally I see a high end HSR as truly robbing other provinces to benefit Central Canada, and I'm absolutely convinced it would be seen in that light by the rest of the country. Whereas saving the increment and using it to begin more modest HFR in Alberta and the Maritimes would give us better transportation in all three regions. How can that not be the better political narrative ?

- Paaul

 

[chrisw]

How many more people will use corridor services vs the rest of the country?

 

[Urban Sky]

How many more people will use corridor services vs the rest of the country?

That’s really not the question here. Building shiny and expensive HSR in Central Canada with federal taxdollars while winding down federally funded services elsewhere in the country simply because we don’t want to spend a tiny fraction of HSR’s pricetag there will not help the perceived neglect by Western and Atlantic Canadians, regardless of what consolation prize they will be offered instead…

 

[guavadelic]

The new CEO has been signaling this for the past couple months in interviews so seems to be only a matter of time before they officially re-brand this project as High Speed Rail. This is a pretty ambitious project so hopefully their meticulous years-long development approach doesn't result in the project getting killed by the political winds in Ottawa.

Might be recency bias but it feels like this is as close we've been to confirming a high speed rail project in this country.

 

[Urban Sky]

Might be recency bias but it feels like this is as close we've been to confirming a high speed rail project in this country.

Which, considering that nobody has ever committed a single Dollar towards building HSR in this country, unfortunately doesn’t say much…

 

[Ward8]

That’s really not the question here. Building shiny and expensive HSR in Central Canada with federal taxdollars while winding down federally funded services elsewhere in the country simply because we don’t want to spend a tiny fraction of HSR’s pricetag there will not help the perceived neglect by Western and Atlantic Canadians, regardless of what consolation prize they will be offered instead…

I personally think that putting all this cash down in Ontario-Quebec while not funding things in the rest of the country is not only a poor decision, but more importantly, it's a good way to not get reelected.

A good project is a good project. The government, whoever it happens to be, shouldn't avoid necessary investment because of potential optics problems. I'm not HSR or bust, but characterizing it as "shiny" is probably selling short how much economic productivity is squandered on the unnecessary economic segregation of the two largest cities in the country.

That said, I've always thought this announcement should come with something related to HSR or similar in Alberta. Calgary and Edmonton are excellent candidates for rail connection and putting Alberta in the mix for federal rail dollars would be prudent from an economic, safety and climate standpoint (not to mention the increased freedom of albertans) but as mentioned, it would be politically convenient as well and would probably make it harder for a new government to cancel either project.

 

[innsertnamehere]

The new CEO has been signaling this for the past couple months in interviews so seems to be only a matter of time before they officially re-brand this project as High Speed Rail. This is a pretty ambitious project so hopefully their meticulous years-long development approach doesn't result in the project getting killed by the political winds in Ottawa.

Might be recency bias but it feels like this is as close we've been to confirming a high speed rail project in this country.

Indeed. Unfortunately we have a pending government change on the federal level - hopefully the Conservatives love high speed rail as much as the Liberals apparently do.

Agreed that advancing a Calgary-Edmonton HSR line would also likely do fairly well, be relatively affordable given the geography, and would quell a lot of the concerns of "ignoring" western Canada.

 

[crs1026]

A good project is a good project. The government, whoever it happens to be, shouldn't avoid necessary investment because of potential optics problems. I'm not HSR or bust, but characterizing it as "shiny" is probably selling short how much economic productivity is squandered on the unnecessary economic segregation of the two largest cities in the country.

That said, I've always thought this announcement should come with something related to HSR or similar in Alberta. Calgary and Edmonton are excellent candidates for rail connection and putting Alberta in the mix for federal rail dollars would be prudent from an economic, safety and climate standpoint (not to mention the increased freedom of albertans) but as mentioned, it would be politically convenient as well and would probably make it harder for a new government to cancel either project.

The thing that has always held back investment in the ON-QC corridor, whether HSR or something more modest, is the lack of public perception of need. Many people comment that our trains are not as good as those elsewhere - but that does not necessarily translate to their wanting to see Ottawa close the gap. The perceived need to do something is growing, but it has taken a long time to happen, and it's the result of things like highway congestion and airport inconvenience that actually touch voters. The business case on paper may have been there all along, but that technocratic consensus doesn't necessarily translate to a sense of urgency in the electorate - as we saw recently when Premier Ford balked at the federal reluctance to build highways.

My fear is that the perceived need in Alberta just may not be there. If Ottawa were to announce a new highway project or airport expansion, there might be cheers. But a train will still be seen (as it has historicallly been seen in ON-QC, by much of the electorate) as a white elephant. Timing is everything, and the need may have to be cultivated. Launch it too soon, or in too grandiose a form, and the opposition will simply promise Alberta more roads. That might win more votes, even if we transport nerds cringe.

- Paul

 

[Northern Light]

That’s really not the question here. Building shiny and expensive HSR in Central Canada with federal taxdollars while winding down federally funded services elsewhere in the country simply because we don’t want to spend a tiny fraction of HSR’s pricetag there will not help the perceived neglect by Western and Atlantic Canadians, regardless of what consolation prize they will be offered instead…

Who is winding down what's left of non-corridor rail service?

I must have missed that announcement.

There is no highway (or road) to Churchhill, MB and building one would likely cost more than replacing the entire LD Fleet........

I think we're getting a bit ahead of ourselves here......