Allandale25
Senior Member
^ potentially it's the RFQ
|
|
|
VIA Rail
- Thread starter ehlow
- Start date
Urban Sky
Senior Member
I‘m not usually a big fan of Greg Gormick, but he wrote a very interesting opinion piece for the Globe and Mail:
www.theglobeandmail.com
Opinion: After the holiday chaos, Via Rail has melted down again – sadly this will continue
Another Via Rail meltdown during the first weekend of February demonstrates the problems plaguing it are becoming routine
www.theglobeandmail.com
Aylmer
New Member
Guy, you're a font of great info and analysis. You don't need that chip on your shoulder, it's all good.
Bordercollie
Senior Member
Okay but what happened that day is not just a funding issue (that is part of it). The main problem was the lack of co-ordination and the lack of organization. Nobody made any good decisions that day and it was felt that it was better to do nothing than to do something.I‘m not usually a big fan of Greg Gormick, but he wrote a very interesting opinion piece for the Globe and Mail:
Opinion: After the holiday chaos, Via Rail has melted down again – sadly this will continue
Another Via Rail meltdown during the first weekend of February demonstrates the problems plaguing it are becoming routine
Charging people for food when stranded on a train for more than a day is not a funding issue. That's a fundamental problem at the core of the organization.
Not informing stations of cancelled trains is just insane. How hard is It to send an email to all stations affected?
The supervisors and managers on duty should be fired.
cplchanb
Senior Member
or study on how to proceed with an RFQ... or a study to potentially upgrade to HSR...
Urban Sky
Senior Member
Northern Light
Superstar
Most of this is the run-of-the-mill presser fluff and stuff we already know; but I'll still pick out a couple of bits that inform what we should be watching for:
Not news, but important to note the restatement of the commitment to electrification.
***
I can't recall, did we identify where these funds were allocated?
***
***
***
There's also a meaningless re-statement of the intention to give some thought to London/Windsor etc.
innsertnamehere
Superstar
that last paragraph is key - ensuring that the door is left open to higher speed segments like Alstom is proposing. I continue to believe that the government will pick a solution more like Alstom's in the closure of the RFP, much like how GO picked a more ambitious solution for GO expansion than originally envisioned.
crs1026
Senior Member
Without running to Google to look up the details, yes this amount was found in an earlier Federal Budget document, and if you hunt back a couple hundred pages in this thread I recall lots of speculation in this thread about what that money was earmarked for. Now we know more.
My takeaways -
a) There is explicit mention of Peterborough and Trois Rivieres as waypoints, but the proponents are left absolutely free to propose whatever existing or new routing is required . This throws out whatever research and engineering that VIA or the JPO may have assembled in the original HFR study. Including any consultation with host railways about use of their tracks or routes. And it clearly puts this project into the largest study space. Better I suppose than how Metrolinx advances projects, but possibly too extreme in the opposite direction. One hoped for something in the middle that made best possible use of what's there today and shortened the whole time to opening day. I don't see this process getting to shovels in the ground in any rapid direct manner.
b) The whole issue of "relationships with host railways" is left completely up in the air. Note that the proponents are barred from contact or communication with said host railways during the development of proposals. I can't imagine anyone submitting a proposal without much greater clarity on where and how they will work with host railways. There is absolutely no potential design that completely excludes use of existing freight lines (unless one plans new corridors all the way into downtown Montreal and Toronto), so this whole question will be a showstopper.
c) There is no independent protection or body of appeal for "local" communities with respect to the "local" service plan. There is a criterion of service being a minimum of 12 trains a day each way, but I presume that applies only to the new HFR backbone and terminal points, ie Toronto-Ottawa-Montreal-Quebec City. I'm not worried about the small fry such as Gananoque or Strathroy - but the larger small cities such as Windsor, Chatham, London, Kitchener-Waterloo, Brantford, Peterborough, Cobourg, Belleville, Kingston, Cornwall, Perth-Smiths Falls, Trois Rivieres, Drummondville deserve to benefit from this project, and should have assurances - and an objective appeals tribunal process - so that their service will be adequate and structured towards growth. Note that these services will in many cases reside on the "host railways" and not on new tracks, so have the most risk to be not better served than today (my point b above) and also these services have the most potential to be iffy on a profit/loss basis. So the economic incentive to both government and the proponent is likely to be to skimp on the local services. The primary ecomonic leverage for this project may lie in its ability to be a "virtual airport" for the four principal cities, but the parallel delivery of benefit to these other communities (in terms of economic development, and especially in terms of reducing auto usage) is a dealbreaker in my view.
- Paul
Last edited:
rbt
Senior Member
I've got to assume the RFP stage will replace the "indirect contact" restriction with a process via the government which will allow bidders to ask questions of railway owners in a way that all bidders see all communications. They can assemble partnerships to create a viable bid without discussing the finer details, but creating an implementable proposal that way isn't going to turn out well.
Also, it looks like an EA will be conducted by the winning proposal since the bidder will be deciding the route: perhaps a 2028 construction start?
Last edited:
Bordercollie
Senior Member
nfitz
Superstar
Looking at the involved parties in the RFP isn't giving me any warm and fuzzy feelings.
TerryJohnson
New Member
The lack of transparency, and the increase in uncertainty since the previous announcements do not inspire confidence.
www.transportaction.ca
HFR Request for Qualifications confirms over-complex procurement process
As representatives of the interests of passengers, Transport Action Canada is concerned by the Government of Canada's lack of transparency and extended procurement process for High Frequency Rail, which are causing unnecessary delay to the desperately needed modernization of passenger rail in...
www.transportaction.ca
cplchanb
Senior Member
Now we know who are the insiders of this project
Bordercollie
Senior Member
At least it creates jobs for beurocrats and finance people.