jje1000
Senior Member
I think the media should hold the Liberals to this, asking- "You said an EA would be done in 2014 and it was never done- what makes this time different?"
|
|
|
- Thread starter ehlow
- Start date
I think the media should hold the Liberals to this, asking- "You said an EA would be done in 2014 and it was never done- what makes this time different?"
BurlOak
Senior Member
It was a stretch goal. You can't blame them for that.
denfromoakvillemilton
Senior Member
If I were the Liberals, I would have committed to speeding up the GO transit service improvements and introducing commuter rail Ottawa.
rbt
Senior Member
Trouble is, they didn't promise an EA would start in 2014; they promised to begin consultations which are necessary to frame the EA at a later time. The CBC article was sloppy with it's wording though so was the official press release (early 2015 refers to the consultations taking place, NOT the EA start).
https://news.ontario.ca/mto/en/2014/12/ontario-moving-forward-with-high-speed-rail.html
They're definitely still slow getting out of the gate and announced the EA way too soon (versus announcing they were doing consultations and preparing a business plan).
That said, the only provincial organization moving slower than Metrolinx is the MTO; slow out of the gate is pretty much the way they operate. Seriously, the Highway 407 BRT EAs are scheduled over a 15+ year period; not construction, just the EAs.
In fact, I think the super-slow MTO and their staff reluctance to get involved in anything transit related is why Metrolinx was created in the first place.
Last edited:
steveintoronto
Superstar
You're right, just accessing your link. They had both fingers crossed behind their backs, and none of them stated: "Simon Says".
But my prior use of the "gullible" term is writ large:
2014:
https://news.ontario.ca/mto/en/2014/12/ontario-moving-forward-with-high-speed-rail.html
2017:
https://twitter.com/MayorMattBrown/...ynne-ontario-high-speed-rail-report-1.4123183
The first is clockwork powered, the latter is battery powered. Different drive mechanism, same mime.
jackass42
New Member
I think that this is a key observation that may be overlooked in all the skepticism about the project - it reminds me of the Ontario Liberal's gambit on the Ontario Pension Plan and how that contributed to an enhancement of the Canada Pension Plan that encompassed some of Ontario's plan.
dowlingm
Senior Member
There doesn't seem to be a lot of enthusiasm for Ottawa commuter rail. Doesn't help that the train station isn't downtown I suppose.
denfromoakvillemilton
Senior Member
Welcome to UT!
I'm shocked. The station not going downtown is not a big factor, but I don't think the LRT can go past Kanata, the airport, and Cumberland.
steveintoronto
Superstar
That's a very good analogy in terms of unintended (but positive) consequences. There might yet be a few more, like provincial drug plans, but I'm pushing the simile.
My initial thought was unions long ago learning to ask more than what they finally settle for, knowing that you'll never get what you state, but you aim it too high because of that, and end-up on target.
I've yet to re-read the final report, it's pretty droll reading, but got the distinct impression that Collenette's role was more as an overseer, and the slog work was done by 'professional report writers'.
Google "high speed rail report Steer Davies Gleave" to see what I mean. They've written a slew of these for many big name high-speed projects. So one wonders just how extensive was Collenette's role in this? Let me proffer: In an executive sense, a lot. Just from his background, which I've been digging on, he has an agenda more in keeping with what Desjardins-Siciliano espouses. For good reason. I don't need to elaborate on that unless challenged, most of us agree that we'd rather an affordable meal of meat, potatoes and vegetables every night than caviar and champagne once a week in lieu, and have pay for it on a credit card with an ever-increasing balance.
Collenette has a pretty humble background and has displayed pretty progressive but grounded ideas on rail elsewhere.
One has to wonder if he won't have a role to play with the Infrastructure Bank...and HFR? He now has a report with sections in it (some I and others have quoted) that makes a compelling case for The Missing Link and HFR (and RER subsidiary to them).
Collenette may be more adept than sometimes given credit for. And there's that CEO position still open at the Infrastructure Bank....hmmmmm....
Edit to Add: Collenette would be considered a Liberal hack if appointed as CEO of the Infrastructure Bank, I withdraw that comment, but he is even more valuable as a "Special Adviser" than I thought from what I'd Googled before.
His experience in Cabinet is very extensive, but regard this:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/David_Collenette
There's the meat, potatoes and veggies. Collenette is being wasted doing promo for HSR.
Second Edit to Add: More on Collenette, albeit from a subjective source:
- Greg Gormick
http://www.highspeedrailcanada.com/2016/08/can-david-collenette-save-high-speed.html
Gormick doesn't reference his claims save for hearsay, but if accepted as based on fact, then "200-km/h electric and 200-km/h diesel" has been dropped in this HSR report for some reason. And that's a curious omission, as it is HFR speed!
It was carefully chosen by Desjardins-Siciliano and others as the highest speed TC permits without mandating grade separation. It's also the achievable and affordable target, and totally compatible with RER, and done with 'conventional' trainsets, diesel, electric or bi-modal, as the last VIA fleet replacement RFQ stated.
Last edited:
kEiThZ
Superstar
Really is disappointing that the media haven't asked this when covering the story.
kEiThZ
Superstar
Why the heck does Ottawa need commuter rail? It's actually bad enough that Stage 2 of their LRT plan takes LRT out of the greenbelt, enabling sprawl when Ottawa has plenty of room to densify inside the greenbelt. You want to add commuter rail to it? No way.
After Stage 2 is completed in 2024, Ottawa will have a transit system that's basically as effective (for its size and layout) as Toronto. At that point, its mostly BRT corridors left and those can be funded with a lot of municipal funding. Intercity rail will become a much bigger issue at that point.
As for GO transit improvements, they are already going as fast as they realistically can. Look at all the track work, station upgrades and new stations. This is all needed before launching RER. Realistically, how much can they accelerate that timeframe? Moreover, it's those GO RER improvements that make the Kitchener HSR feasible. So it's leveraging investments being made now.
kEiThZ
Superstar
Welcome to UT.
You could be right.....or this could be another half-cocked Ontario Liberal idea. See their Green Energy screwup.
All I see is that there's no funding here. There's an EA and an appeal for P3. Looking at that, in the context of the upcoming Infrastructure Bank and they are practically begging for the feds to roll this into VIA's HFR proposal. Ontario does not have $20 billion to spend on HSR over the next 8.5 years. $20 billion would deliver the full GO RER plan and the DRL. So there's no way, they will build this thing. At best, they'll hand it off to someone like VIA and maybe put down a billion or two to make the project feasible. And that's if someone like VIA and/or the Infrastructure Bank will take this on (if they do, it probably won't be HSR in the traditional definition of the term).
rbt
Senior Member
Actually, barring a recession, it does. Moody's recently upgraded Ontario's outlook (following downgrades in 2012/2015), interest on existing debt continues to drop as they roll it over, and revenue is up. All those things make significant space in borrowing capacity at current tax rates.
Should Ontario build HSR is another question. I'll lean toward yes (if even a tiny operating profit can be managed) as the alternative is a 12 lane 401 program to London.
Last edited:
kEiThZ
Superstar
@rbt
I have my doubts about the public tolerating $20 billion in debt. Even if they have the credit to do it. The debt load is already high in the province. And debt servicing is now a major item in the provincial budget. At a time when interest rates are exceptionally low. This is why I think this thing only happens when somebody else takes it on..... Like the infra bank.
As for building it, it's clear from the report that the case only exists for the 250 kph line and only till London. Of course the next question is where is the sensitivity analysis? What if they go to 200 kph or 160kph for HFR? What's the business case for that?
I have my doubts about the public tolerating $20 billion in debt. Even if they have the credit to do it. The debt load is already high in the province. And debt servicing is now a major item in the provincial budget. At a time when interest rates are exceptionally low. This is why I think this thing only happens when somebody else takes it on..... Like the infra bank.
As for building it, it's clear from the report that the case only exists for the 250 kph line and only till London. Of course the next question is where is the sensitivity analysis? What if they go to 200 kph or 160kph for HFR? What's the business case for that?
rbt
Senior Member
Maybe. Very few complain about the $4B/year MTO is taking on in debt for highway projects. Even on Urban Toronto's own Roads thread, capital costs are rarely mentioned but nearly every transit thread goes over capital costs in great detail. Tory has even been praised for taking on more debt than necessary on Gardiner to accelerate construction.
In short, I don't think the public really cares about $20B in debt BUT you are probably right that many will not tolerate it for a train to London.
Last edited: