VIA Rail

[ARG1]

Nobody ever campaigns on things they are going to cut or cancel specifically. It's rather unpopular. They just make generic commitments like, "We're going to balance the budget." They don't tell you how they will do that. You find out, after they take power.

I think most of us hope you're right. But I fear you might be wrong. This version of the CPC seems almost venegful and willing to burn something down just because Trudeau did it. I will also say that the risk is so much higher thanks to scope increases dramatically driving up the cost. I am hoping something will come of this.

You're right in theory...

... The problem is this:

Les conservateurs insistent : « On ne financera pas le tramway de Québec! »

Le lieutenant conservateur pour le Québec, Pierre Paul-Hus, s'engage à financer un troisième lien autoroutier.

ici.radio-canada.ca

Duclos crie au «vol» conservateur pour le tramway

Québec pourrait bientôt être victime d'un «vol», craint le ministre fédéral Jean-Yves Duclos, devant des conservateurs qui persistent et signent à vouloir retirer le financement promis au tramway s'ils sont portés au pouvoir.

www.lesoleil.com

The CPC at this very moment is running a strong campaign against the Quebec City Tramway, talking about how it's expensive and that under their government, the project won't receive a dime. The point of this being that "shutting up and not talking about what "boondoggle" they will cut funding to" very much isn't their MO, and never really has been. If they're willing to scream from the rooftops about the tramway, but they're not saying a word about HxR despite how much more expensive the latter will be, it does at the very least hint at them wanting to keep it around in some form. It might not be French Style TGV but rather some 200km/h higher speed train, but it's unlikely to be outright cancelled.

 

[Urban Sky]

The fiscal tradition in this country is that urban/suburban/regional transit is a provincial responsibility, whereas intercity passenger rail transport (especially of the interprovincial kind) is a federal reponsibility. I so far don’t see the Conservatives questioning this…

 

[crs1026]

The fiscal tradition in this country is that urban/suburban/regional transit is a provincial responsibility, whereas intercity passenger rail transport (especially of the interprovincial kind) is a federal reponsibility. I so far don’t see the Conservatives questioning this…

This is true, but it hasn't prevented Ottawa from setting up funding streams to pay for local transit projects and equipment. The Liberals have been very happy to write cheques for transit.
I would certainly expect a more spending-averse incoming government to reassess the funds and commitments that are in place. Doesn't mean they would yank previous commitments, but they might certainly curtail any further approvals. Or look with some new formula for distributing the money differently between regions.
We are still reading tea leaves here. Worth pointing out possibilities, but I don't have anything firm enough to go from to offer a prediction. Those who have firm views may be surprised, one way or the other.

- Paul

 

[micheal_can]

The fiscal tradition in this country is that urban/suburban/regional transit is a provincial responsibility, whereas intercity passenger rail transport (especially of the interprovincial kind) is a federal reponsibility. I so far don’t see the Conservatives questioning this…

That hasn't been true since 2008 when the CPC under Harper started throwing money at the provinces to build transit to rebound from the Great recession. It is how the Crosstown, REM, iON, HLRT,Finch LRT, and even the Ontario Line among others got funding.