[nfitz]

Actually, asking this question makes a lot of sense.

That's how Nimbyism works. Instead of simply opposing it, and getting nowhere, you gas light them with sensible-seeming questions.

Look at the original Weston Blue 22 consultations as a master study on how to stop a project - and force the creation of an organization that now prioritizes secrecy over safety.

 

[micheal_can]

That's how Nimbyism works. Instead of simply opposing it, and getting nowhere, you gas light them with sensible-seeming questions.

Look at the original Weston Blue 22 consultations as a master study on how to stop a project - and force the creation of an organization that now prioritizes secrecy over safety.

So, we need to return the gaslighting then?

 

[crs1026]

That's how Nimbyism works. Instead of simply opposing it, and getting nowhere, you gas light them with sensible-seeming questions.

"Don't ask a question unless you can live with the answer" is sometimes wise, but when you have explicitly asked for two plans, and then quietly sideline one while choosing the other, that's not gaslighting.... it's avoiding the question because it might have an ugly answer..

If the nimby's found out that there is an option that could make greater use of existing or abandoned railway rights of way, with little or no greenfield construction......and could tolerate level crossings in places.... would they be more opposed or less opposed?

Look at the original Weston Blue 22 consultations as a master study on how to stop a project - and force the creation of an organization that now prioritizes secrecy over safety.

Well, there was a fantasy that things like Blue 22 could be funded from the private sector, so the politicians didn't have to get their hands dirty with justifying a large public expenditure. That's a nice fantasy that is occasionally true, but forcing a public entity to make those decisions and address a major expansion of both airport and regional transit was the right path. Unfortunately, it was executed badly and we have a monolith that can't execute three car funeral processions.

- Paul

 

[nfitz]

Well, there was a fantasy that things like Blue 22 could be funded from the private sector, so the politicians didn't have to get their hands dirty with justifying a large public expenditure.

That's nothing to do with the Weston consultations. They didn't start until after it went from private to Metrolinx. Yeah, which means it wasn't actually "Blue 22" at that point in time.

(I think we are at Blue 28 now ... Blue 34 when they finish adding the additional stations.

 

[micheal_can]

"Don't ask a question unless you can live with the answer" is sometimes wise, but when you have explicitly asked for two plans, and then quietly sideline one while choosing the other, that's not gaslighting.... it's avoiding the question because it might have an ugly answer..

If the nimby's found out that there is an option that could make greater use of existing or abandoned railway rights of way, with little or no greenfield construction......and could tolerate level crossings in places.... would they be more opposed or less opposed?

In this political landscape, and the one we have been in for the last 5 years, they will always choose the cheapest option. The problem is that it would not actually solve the real problems. The real problem is not frequency, but frequency and speed. So, at the end of the day, like it or not, ALTO fixes both. It fixes the frequency by owning the ROW. It fixes the speed by straightening the corners as much as possible.

And it fixes one more - it has us stop dithering about HSR in Canada.

 

[crs1026]

That's nothing to do with the Weston consultations. They didn't start until after it went from private to Metrolinx. Yeah, which means it wasn't actually "Blue 22" at that point in time.

(I think we are at Blue 28 now ... Blue 34 when they finish adding the additional stations.

Ah.... were you referring to the pushback from Weston over the idea of a surface level 4-track mainline dividing their community?

I would say the NIMBY's saved the day on that one. That part of town would be a whole lot worse today without the grade separation. It was actually a good case study for the premise that engineers and bean counters should not have the only say in a plan.

The only foolish part was having an international design competition for a pretty mundane footbridge.

The commitment to only use Tier IV diesels on that route never made much sense, and was conveniently forgotten.

- Paul

 

[SFO-YYZ]

Fourth Conservative MP crosses to liberals this morning. Along with the by elections this will give the liberals a safe majority of 173-174 for the next couple of years, short of any major scandals or budget confidence votes. Not to mention Carney’s record ~70% approval rating across the board (a much better champion for this project than say JT). I’d say even without a majority, Alto is much safer since it has cross party support across the Bloc, NDP, Greens and Liberals. The only ones complaining are some car brained conservative conspiracy peddling MPs.

Also, after last week’s little stunt, nothing more out of Poilievre regarding this file. I think he probably knew very little about this project, and likely doesn’t care whether it goes thru or not. He just wanted to test and see which wedge issue to use to get people riled up and get his support numbers back up. It’s all just a game.

https://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/conservative-mp-marilyn-gladu-crosses-floor-to-liberals-9.7156167

 

[McGillicuddy]

If the Liberals lose the next election and the project is still in the Establishing A Framework To Initiate Discussions With Potential Vendors Related To Planning A Model For Developing A Project phase, it won't matter how high Mark Carney's approval rating was in the spring of 2026.

Great, they've got the mandate to do it now. So will they get it done now? Or will this drag on and on and on and on, despite the best of intentions?

 

[micheal_can]

If the Liberals lose the next election and the project is still in the Establishing A Framework To Initiate Discussions With Potential Vendors Related To Planning A Model For Developing A Project phase, it won't matter how high Mark Carney's approval rating was in the spring of 2026.

Great, they've got the mandate to do it now. So will they get it done now? Or will this drag on and on and on and on, despite the best of intentions?

With the expectations of a majority from the floor crosser and the by elections, the next election likely isn't till Oct 2029. This project now has a reasonably secure future.

 

[Thaboss]

Fourth Conservative MP crosses to liberals this morning. Along with the by elections this will give the liberals a safe majority of 173-174 for the next couple of years, short of any major scandals or budget confidence votes. Not to mention Carney’s record ~70% approval rating across the board (a much better champion for this project than say JT). I’d say even without a majority, Alto is much safer since it has cross party support across the Bloc, NDP, Greens and Liberals. The only ones complaining are some car brained conservative conspiracy peddling MPs.

Also, after last week’s little stunt, nothing more out of Poilievre regarding this file. I think he probably knew very little about this project, and likely doesn’t care whether it goes thru or not. He just wanted to test and see which wedge issue to use to get people riled up and get his support numbers back up. It’s all just a game.

https://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/conservative-mp-marilyn-gladu-crosses-floor-to-liberals-9.7156167

With the expectations of a majority from the floor crosser and the by elections, the next election likely isn't till Oct 2029. This project now has a reasonably secure future.

While I think the odds are at their highest right this moment, I think a guaranteed majority for the next four years is less favorable to HSR as one might think because final funding decsion and shovels into the ground arent expected until 2029/2030 which coincide with the next election. Thus increasing the odds that HSR will be an election issue, something you do not want.

A minority with an election late this year or next while carney remains popular as ever would've been the better outcome for this project imo.

I have said for a while now, Alto life and death hinges on Marc carney or perhaps the NDP winning a majority/minorty mandate following the current govt. At that point we will guarantee that ottawa to montreal construction is well on its way and toronto to ottawa construction is partially on its way.

If a con. Govt gets into office they may well slow construction, reduce scope (quebec to montreal line is my long term predicted casualty, especially given the electorate over there) but certainly not cancel the whole thing.

As with many things transit, when the public gets a taste if the good stuff, Goodluck advocating for its cancelation

 

[micheal_can]

While I think the odds are at their highest right this moment, I think a guaranteed majority for the next four years is less favorable to HSR as one might think because final funding decsion and shovels into the ground arent expected until 2029/2030 which coincide with the next election. Thus increasing the odds that HSR will be an election issue, something you do not want.

A minority with an election late this year or next while carney remains popular as ever would've been the better outcome for this project imo.

I have said for a while now, Alto life and death hinges on Marc carney or perhaps the NDP winning a majority/minorty mandate following the current govt. At that point we will guarantee that ottawa to montreal construction is well on its way and toronto to ottawa construction is partially on its way.

If a con. Govt gets into office they may well slow construction, reduce scope (quebec to montreal line is my long term predicted casualty, especially given the electorate over there) but certainly not cancel the whole thing.

As with many things transit, when the public gets a taste if the good stuff, Goodluck advocating for its cancelation

With over 60% support from the CPC voters, my guess is it wont be a highlighted topic.

https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/calgary/alberta-passenger-rail-plan-9.7118616

This was posted a month ago. If we seem something out west being worked on, whether the actual shovels are in the ground or not, there is no way either of the major parties will shut them down.

 

[Thaboss]

With over 60% support from the CPC voters, my guess is it wont be a highlighted topic.

https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/calgary/alberta-passenger-rail-plan-9.7118616

This was posted a month ago. If we seem something out west being worked on, whether the actual shovels are in the ground or not, there is no way either of the major parties will shut them down.

I'm aware of current polling around alto, but a common occurrence in politics is that anything touched by an unpopular govt will be thrown out or "placed under review" by incoming govt.

Not saying that this will happen but it certainly could, especially if a hypothetical conservative govt in 4 years is looking to "fund" a tax cut.

Remember that when Ford entered govt he delayed/cancled several projects that he would then go on to fund several years later....that imo is the biggest risk to alto if significant shovels arent in the grounf by the time this govt loses power.

 

[hw621]

With over 60% support from the CPC voters, my guess is it wont be a highlighted topic.

https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/calgary/alberta-passenger-rail-plan-9.7118616

This was posted a month ago. If we seem something out west being worked on, whether the actual shovels are in the ground or not, there is no way either of the major parties will shut them down.

Then why would PP come out and openly opposed it?!

 

[McGillicuddy]

If a con. Govt gets into office they may well slow construction, reduce scope (quebec to montreal line is my long term predicted casualty, especially given the electorate over there) but certainly not cancel the whole thing.

The thing with parties soaring from opposition into majority positions is that, whatever their previously-stated principles, they tend to fold themselves into pretzels for whatever constituencies made their majority.

In this case, while it's true the Conservatives hold very few Quebec seats at the moment, it's very possible that a future Conservative majority would be built on several seats in Quebec, particularly in greater Quebec City and in Montreal's off-island suburbs. To cut a major infrastructure project in the region could become politically costly through the alchemy of forming a majority government.

It is unlikely that this future Conservative majority would hold very many seats in downtown Toronto or central Ottawa. And if the perception in English Canada is that this expensive train line is a toy for downtowners and a smug affront to all the good, honest rural folk and small-towners trapped in between, that makes it an easy cull.

 

[micheal_can]

Then why would PP come out and openly opposed it?!

No idea. Only reason I can think is the rural areas are CPC ridings. So, he may think saying something will show them he cares.