CN has signed an agreement in principle for the bypass,
It still begs the question, do we have an agreement with CN for west of Bramalea, and if not, why not.
Indeed, an "Agreement in Principle" means absolutely nothing. "Simon Says" has just as much standing legally.
Have any of the reports issued to-date discussed specific potential rolling stock options?
Here's a point I addressed earlier in today in this string. There are stated conflicts. Serious ones. QP's statement for High Speed states "electric trains". Not Hydrogen. It's a bit moot as HSR as claimed will never get built, but it's indicative of how scatterbrained and desperate this game has become.
Wouldn't it make more sense to start with HSR between Toronto and Montreal?
I guess though that would have to be on the national level and doesn't work as an Ontario Election promise.
Well they do tie together, but the FedLibs have studiously avoided mentioning the OntHSR, not least because it's an embarrassment, and flies in the face of Desjardins-Siciliano's stance for HFR, which is well-founded and analytical.
It must rankle the Feds that QP keeps talking "HSR" when they could/should be talking "HFR extension". A fraction of the price, and almost as fast.
Instead, Wynne spins a desperate dream. Ontarians might be naive, but they're not completely stupid. They know what they've been promised prior...and I venture another point on this:
The FedLibs, given enough support by Quebec and Ontario to extend Montreal/Toronto HFR each end, would feel they had the overwhelming public support to invoke politically dangerous parts of the various Railway/Transportation Acts to impose a solution re Freight Bypass on the Class 1 railways and then start planning a *realistic* passenger plan for the corridor that carries 95% of all rail passenger traffic in Canada.
Could the Feds do this by themselves? Absolutely, but they won't, unless the PQ and Ont are also on-board.
Wynne is estranging the Feds on rail policy, and doing herself an incredible disfavour at the same time.