[micheal_can]

Just gets studied to death and delayed to another election. Then studied to death. Then promised at the end of that election. By then we will have had like 20 years of liberals. The PCs will take over. And it will be delayed indefinitely. This isn’t rocket science. Unless cash is going to flow it’s just an election promise. This is just an urban thread with lots of people who used to play with toy trains. Everyone is skeptical of election promises unless it is something they want. Then they believe anything.

TBH, I am very skeptical too, but it seems this is the furthest something HSR has actually gotten in Canada before. When I was in the RCN, I remember many promises of new ships and my attitude was "We are not getting new ships till I cross the brow, sail,go home and then cross the brow and sail again." HSR is much the same. However for this project, I am trying to be more optimistic. I know it may just be election promise carrots. I know that it could be cancelled within a year. I know that it could be canceled within 5 years. It won't ever get cheaper to build. It won't ever be easier to build. So, I am hopeful it does get built, but I also know it can be canceled at any time. This section, especially the Montreal - Ottawa - Toronto is the section in Canada that really needs it. I am hoping that enough politicians in as many parties see that and keep it going for the next 3+ elections.

 

[sixrings]

TBH, I am very skeptical too, but it seems this is the furthest something HSR has actually gotten in Canada before. When I was in the RCN, I remember many promises of new ships and my attitude was "We are not getting new ships till I cross the brow, sail,go home and then cross the brow and sail again." HSR is much the same. However for this project, I am trying to be more optimistic. I know it may just be election promise carrots. I know that it could be cancelled within a year. I know that it could be canceled within 5 years. It won't ever get cheaper to build. It won't ever be easier to build. So, I am hopeful it does get built, but I also know it can be canceled at any time. This section, especially the Montreal - Ottawa - Toronto is the section in Canada that really needs it. I am hoping that enough politicians in as many parties see that and keep it going for the next 3+ elections.

Admitting you’re skeptical but then saying you’re trying to be optimistic. This is my point. It’s something you want so you’re trying to be optimistic. I use this train frequently. Half the trains are empty. Meanwhile flixbus is constantly sold out at half the price. Everyone is talking about cheap subsidized rides. So spend 80 billion building then more billions subsidizing tickets. That makes sense to people because they use or would like to use rail. But it’s an unrealistic and unsustainable model.

 

[crs1026]

The point that I believe has sunk into all parties is - the current sharing of VIA with CN in the Corridor is not working and likely not fixable.

So, all parties will have to grapple with the question of VIA's future - perhaps only when it comes to budget time, if not at election time.

This does not mean that HSR or even HFR will be embraced - I could see a negotiation where Ottawa says to CN, "What will X $B buy us?", and some revisiting of the 2008 project being considered, albeit with new ground rules and more informed pricing. Cn's position might well be, "we don't want VIA on our tracks, period" - which would push towards the idea of a "new" routing, likely reclaiming the Havelock line with some improvements or new segments.

And when that budgeting process receives submissions from GTAA and Trudeau asking for additions to air terminals or runways......government may be eager to find cheaper alternatives to airport expansion.

The point being all parties may be willing to spend something, but far less than the HSR envelope. The vanilla HFR envelope in particular may look a lot more attractive than at present....people are still in dream big mode.

- Paul

 

[sixrings]

The point that I believe has sunk into all parties is - the current sharing of VIA with CN in the Corridor is not working and likely not fixable.

So, all parties will have to grapple with the question of VIA's future - perhaps only when it comes to budget time, if not at election time.

This does not mean that HSR or even HFR will be embraced - I could see a negotiation where Ottawa says to CN, "What will X $B buy us?", and some revisiting of the 2008 project being considered, albeit with new ground rules and more informed pricing. Cn's position might well be, "we don't want VIA on our tracks, period" - which would push towards the idea of a "new" routing, likely reclaiming the Havelock line with some improvements or new segments.

And when that budgeting process receives submissions from GTAA and Trudeau asking for additions to air terminals or runways......government may be eager to find cheaper alternatives to airport expansion.

The point being all parties may be willing to spend something, but far less than the HSR envelope. The vanilla HFR envelope in particular may look a lot more attractive than at present....people are still in dream big mode.

- Paul

The problem I have with this is the list of reasons we need to do this is seemingly endless on this thread.

Family in another city
Environment reasons
Business reasons
If we had HSR we could live in Peterborough and work in Toronto for a third of the cost but by commuting for a handful of dollars each way. Long way of saying housing.
Equity. Some people don’t drive.
We don’t need to expand air ports so we would save money there.

It really is endless. However the loss of production in Toronto by congestion is billions annually. So people use that as a reason to advocate that it’s best to spend countless money on subways, go trains, bike lanes and all the other things they want. Yet that’s not how things work. It gets us to move and do things but not to the extent we want them or as fast as we want them. If it did we would have had go 2.0, transit city would have been fully built and places like Mississauga would have a subway by now.

 

[crs1026]

The problem I have with this is the list of reasons we need to do this is seemingly endless on this thread.

Family in another city
Environment reasons
Business reasons
If we had HSR we could live in Peterborough and work in Toronto for a third of the cost but by commuting for a handful of dollars each way. Long way of saying housing.
Equity. Some people don’t drive.
We don’t need to expand air ports so we would save money there.

It really is endless. However the loss of production in Toronto by congestion is billions annually. So people use that as a reason to advocate that it’s best to spend countless money on subways, go trains, bike lanes and all the other things they want. Yet that’s not how things work. It gets us to move and do things but not to the extent we want them or as fast as we want them. If it did we would have had go 2.0, transit city would have been fully built and places like Mississauga would have a subway by now.

Actually if you read up, early on in this thread, I took the list of justifications that Alto put forward and disputed a number of them.

The point that survived best is, the current VIA operation on shared tracks is unsatisfactory and unsustainable.

While spending an entire HFR envelope may not be acceptable, many people (spanning all political spectrums) now acknowledge that the problem won't go away without investment, and agree that it's worth spending some amount to enable retention of some sort of corridor rail.

You won't find a single news article suggesting that we should just stick with status quo, or that we should shut down VIA altogether. What is up for debate - and likely unavoidable - is the question of how much to spend and on what.

Some of the arguments may be fluff, sure.... but not all of them. Especially if you agree that we are choking on congestion, and it is harming our national productivity.

- Paul

 

[sixrings]

Actually if you read up, early on in this thread, I took the list of justifications that Alto put forward and disputed a number of them.

The point that survived best is, the current VIA operation on shared tracks is unsatisfactory and unsustainable.

While spending an entire HFR envelope may not be acceptable, many people (spanning all political spectrums) now acknowledge that the problem won't go away without investment, and agree that it's worth spending some amount to enable retention of some sort of corridor rail.

You won't find a single news article suggesting that we should just stick with status quo, or that we should shut down VIA altogether. What is up for debate - and likely unavoidable - is the question of how much to spend and on what.

Some of the arguments may be fluff, sure.... but not all of them. Especially if you agree that we are choking on congestion, and it is harming our national productivity.

- Paul

I can understand the tracks need to be replaced. That it needs its own track and can’t share with a freight corridor. But HSR is like asking for subways to Mississauga or Pickering or wherever. It’s the Cadillac of services. And depending on your position people justify things. It’s all subjective but I have high doubts HSR will be a thing in my lifetime and I’m 45.

 

[nfitz]

It's a Hail Mary proposal from the Liberals to try to hold on to power. I see no especial reason to take it seriously.

Awarding $billions in a multi-year contract that could even outlive the next (45th) parliament isn't serious? After preparations since the 42nd parliament - last decade?

I can see reasons to believe it won't be built. But it's hard to think this wasn't serious. Or a last minute pre-election thing. We know the decision was made last October.

Besides - I don't think this is the kind of thing that would sway elections. It might even get some opposing votes, given the concerns we here from some in places like Peterborough and Sharbot Lake.

 

[kEiThZ]

It really is endless. However the loss of production in Toronto by congestion is billions annually. So people use that as a reason to advocate that it’s best to spend countless money on subways, go trains, bike lanes and all the other things they want. Yet that’s not how things work. It gets us to move and do things but not to the extent we want them or as fast as we want them. If it did we would have had go 2.0, transit city would have been fully built and places like Mississauga would have a subway by now.

You should let your mayor and premier know that you have problems with congestion and leave intercity and inter-regional transport to the feds.

 

[nfitz]

You should let your mayor and premier know that you have problems with congestion and leave intercity and inter-regional transport to the feds.

You say this like this isn't a local Toronto forum. (Urban Toronto at that - not even suburban ! )

 

[Irishmonk]

The problem I have with this is the list of reasons we need to do this is seemingly endless on this thread.

Family in another city
Environment reasons
Business reasons
If we had HSR we could live in Peterborough and work in Toronto for a third of the cost but by commuting for a handful of dollars each way. Long way of saying housing.
Equity. Some people don’t drive.
We don’t need to expand air ports so we would save money there.

It really is endless. However the loss of production in Toronto by congestion is billions annually. So people use that as a reason to advocate that it’s best to spend countless money on subways, go trains, bike lanes and all the other things they want. Yet that’s not how things work. It gets us to move and do things but not to the extent we want them or as fast as we want them. If it did we would have had go 2.0, transit city would have been fully built and places like Mississauga would have a subway by now.

Don't forget national pride. We could use a big, flashy infrastructure project to help boost morale and emphasize some basic differences between us and our wretched neighbour to the south.

 

[Natika33]

Don't forget national pride. We could use a big, flashy infrastructure project to help boost morale and emphasize some basic differences between us and our wretched neighbour to the south.

Thank you sixrings & Irishmonk for this great summarized list of all the things one could include when writing letters of support for HSR to the Powers-that-Be.

 

[nfitz]

Don't forget national pride. We could use a big, flashy infrastructure project to help boost morale and emphasize some basic differences between us and our wretched neighbour to the south.

I don't think that an expensive toy for the southern part of Central Canada is going to do much for "national" pride.

I'll admit I'm wrong if they use a golden spike to finish it off.

 

[Irishmonk]

I don't think that an expensive toy for the southern part of Central Canada is going to do much for "national" pride.

I'll admit I'm wrong if they use a golden spike to finish it off.

Expensive, sure, but definitely not a toy since it has obvious utility and will take many people out of planes and cars, as well as link two provinces and 3 major cities. It would also set a precedent for potential lines in other provinces--well, specifically, Alberta and BC.

I crowd-sourced golden spike comin' up!

 

[nfitz]

Expensive, sure, but definitely not a toy since it has obvious ...

Obviously not a toy.

But you don't think this is how it will get spun in provinces that managed to spin Trudeau screwing Canada by giving away control of Oil to the provinces, into Trudeau hating Alberta? And Trudeau II being anti-pipeline from Trudeau pisses off Liberal support in Quebec and BC by spending $billions on a pipeline from Alberta that was so economically unviable that it's losing money?

 

[Urban Sky]

Awarding $billions in a multi-year contract that could even outlive the next (45th) parliament isn't serious? After preparations since the 42nd parliament - last decade?

Yet, the multi-billion contract is only for planning and project development, not any construction, which will need to be decided in 5+ years, i.e., by the 46th or 47th parliament…

I can see reasons to believe it won't be built. But it's hard to think this wasn't serious. Or a last minute pre-election thing. We know the decision was made last October.

Marginally less insincere than Wynne‘s election stunt which only showed signs of activity in the final months of a provincial election? Probably, but escalating the scope of the project still seems to be a means in itself, as it allows them to delay making actual capital funding decisions and to make hard choices which might disappoint multiple ridings (especially those east of Montreal)…

Besides - I don't think this is the kind of thing that would sway elections. It might even get some opposing votes, given the concerns we here from some in places like Peterborough and Sharbot Lake.

That‘s why they draw a straight line from Peterborough to Vaudreuil, except for the Smiths Falls to De Beaujeu segment via Ottawa, which is already owned by VIA, because allowing actual decisions to be made or different options to be publicly discussed might risk upsetting some marginal seats…