[C_Johnson_1995]

The ACTA link to your quote is unfortunately dead (and googling some phrases yields no results from outside this forum), but YDS has not been VIA CEO since 2019 and I highly doubt that he would reply to PP’s criticisms of VIA while at the helm of Siemens Canada.

Anyways, once PP finds himself in office he will very soon realize that VIA does not offer any subsidized service in direct competition against private airlines, as it is not subsidized in any of the (corridor) markets where it could be considered a credible alternative to the airplane. Which is even acknowledged in your own post:


Also, the subsidized (non-Corridor) routes disproportionately serve exactly the kind of remote communities where he rides on their sense of being abandoned. In short, I fail to see what he has to gain by cutting the measly funding which goes into non-Corridor VIA, let alone killing: HFR (though he might scale it down if it’s over-reliant on taxpayer funding) or anything resembling the ideological grievances he holds against, say, the CBC…

I will preface that this is entirely my perception, but I believe that you are wrong to interpret Pollievre as a rational actor governed by logic. He isn't as much beholden to specific voters than he is to corporate interests and general libertarian and anti-Trudeau vibes.

As much as he rides on the votes of remote communities, the reality is that any community truly dependent on VIA has a very small amount of votes compared to the broader rural types that are car dependent. That group probably has no idea that VIA exists or runs near them. They would probably be more satisfied with the Canadian and Ocean being cut in order to fill the image of "axing the tax", even if the savings are non-existant because trains are socialism and they want to be able to save money on gas when they drive their Hummer 15ft down the driveway to pick up their mail.

It isn't smart to rest on the idea that the CPC's ideological hatred of public institutions is grounded in any sort of reasoning or stops at the CBC.

 

[crs1026]

I will preface that this is entirely my perception, but I believe that you are wrong to interpret Pollievre as a rational actor governed by logic. He isn't as much beholden to specific voters than he is to corporate interests and general libertarian and anti-Trudeau vibes.

As much as he rides on the votes of remote communities, the reality is that any community truly dependent on VIA has a very small amount of votes compared to the broader rural types that are car dependent. That group probably has no idea that VIA exists or runs near them. They would probably be more satisfied with the Canadian and Ocean being cut in order to fill the image of "axing the tax", even if the savings are non-existant because trains are socialism and they want to be able to save money on gas when they drive their Hummer 15ft down the driveway to pick up their mail.

It isn't smart to rest on the idea that the CPC's ideological hatred of public institutions is grounded in any sort of reasoning or stops at the CBC.

I agree that there is not much backlash potential in axing VIA in the east or west, because those voters are already not getting any value from VIA, and it does fit (cosmetically, but appearances matter as much as substance) with an "axe the tax" stance. However I do think the cost and impact of the shutdown would be objectionable in Vancouver, Winnipeg, and Halifax, because there are substantial job losses inherent in those operational centers. And don't underestimate the sticker shock from the overall cost of shutting down in pension maintenance and severance costs. It may be ideologically tempting, but letting sleeping dogs lie may be safer. One could impose a sunset date or demand a study and cut the subsidy, which would kick the matter down the road. (Reinvestment in new fleet is likely dead, however, so the HEP I end of life may dictate the sunset date).

The harder part however would be taking a whack at VIA in Central Canada, which CPC would have to do to as well to show the rest of the country that he is being even handed (and getting his revenge on privileged Liberal territory) relative to the cuts imposed in them..... and that's where PP may have to grow up quickly. There are many voters and seats in Central Canada at stake. Perhaps HxR would die, or be deferred, and I expect the Infrastructure Bank (which never accomplished anything, and was a marginal idea to begin with) would be wound down. But.... when the air lobby turns up and asks for new airport construction to expand Pearson or Trudeau? When Ford turns up and asks for federal transit support, so he can afford to build his latest expressway (whose only value is enriching his Muskoka golfing buddies with their development projects) - would CPC swallow those potentially greater costs while three HxR consortiums are pointing out how their proposals are good business deals?

Perhaps CPC really is dominated by radicals driving Hummers, but sometimes governments have to swallow their ideology, and I'm hoping that's the case here.

- Paul

 

[micheal_can]

Pointing me to the library is not providing your answer. Did Harper balance the budget?

Yes he did, and the proof was in that"library.". Open an article on that list from your favourite news agency and you will see it.

 

[micheal_can]

A gravity model works well to help compare transportation demand (not just rail) between markets with similar sinergies. In this case we have two cities in the same province, one of which is the provincial capital, with very little population between them. The most obvious compariale in the corridor to me would be Montreal-Quebec City. I'll also compare it to Edmonton-Calgary.

	CMA Population	Distance (km)	Gravity (million people / km^2)
Montreal	4,291,732​	255​	55​
Quebec City	839,311​
Calgary	1,481,806​	300​	23​
Edmonton	1,418,118​
Saskatoon	317,480​	262​	1.2​
Regina	249,217​

As you can see the demand between Calgary and Edmonton is estimated to be less than half that of Montreal-Quebec City, and Sascatoon-Regina has about 2% of the demand. So if there are 5 Montreal-Quebec City trains a day, one could see 2 (maybe 3) Calgary-Edmonton trains a day, but not even 1 train a week between Saskatoon and Regina. At that point, you would be better off looking at other tranportation options, better suted to the demand.

I didn't include Ottawa-Toronto, as about 1/4 of Ottawa's CMA population is in Quebec, nor did I include London-Toronto, as it has significant population between the two.

The problem with that thinking... is that we already know there are plans for HxR between Montreal and Quebec City, so the number is skewed. After the east section of HxR is built, we all know that it will be much more than 5 trains a day. At current standards, you can say what you did because it is based on the frequency it can do, not what it could do. Maybe M-QC can support 10or even 15 a day. With that, that would then bring up the C-E to 4-6 or even higher. And maybe only 1 train a day is sufficient for R-S. That is a lot more than what is there now.

 

[C_Johnson_1995]

One could impose a sunset date or demand a study and cut the subsidy, which would kick the matter down the road. (Reinvestment in new fleet is likely dead, however, so the HEP I end of life may dictate the sunset date).

I agree that with this. The LDS will almost certainly die with the HEP and Ren fleets IMO.

But.... when the air lobby turns up and asks for new airport construction to expand Pearson or Trudeau? When Ford turns up and asks for federal transit support, so he can afford to build his latest expressway (whose only value is enriching his Muskoka golfing buddies with their development projects) - would CPC swallow those potentially greater costs while three HxR consortiums are pointing out how their proposals are good business deals?

Another interesting hypothetical. I personally think that the CPC will go full austerity and say no to federal funding of basically any infra. Ford has been buoyed by investing in stuff like transport to benefit his donors and smokescreen his blatant corruption, but when the well of federal funds runs dry, things are going to get ugly. I could easily see PP and Ford coming to (figurative) blows over this, and as much as I am not looking forward to seeing the aftermath of the next election, I can't say I wouldn't get a kick out of blue on blue infighting.

 

[micheal_can]

Another interesting hypothetical. I personally think that the CPC will go full austerity and say no to federal funding of basically any infra. Ford has been buoyed by investing in stuff like transport to benefit his donors and smokescreen his blatant corruption, but when the well of federal funds runs dry, things are going to get ugly. I could easily see PP and Ford coming to (figurative) blows over this, and as much as I am not looking forward to seeing the aftermath of the next election, I can't say I wouldn't get a kick out of blue on blue infighting.

That sounds like the Chretien era where not just no new spending,but massive cuts.

 

[lenaitch]

A once daily Ocean or Canadian, especially during peak periods would likely be profitable, considering that the Canadian is already profitable..

Is that conclusion based on some manner of analysis or hope? Profitability has to take into account the increase in equipment and staffing plus the expectation of a critical mass of passengers each and every day.

I got an idea. Show me how to get from Regina to Saskatoon without a car.
They are close enough that even a singular train bouncing back and forth a few times a day would be plenty.

A bus service. I imagine a decent schedule could be maintained in spite of the massive traffic tie-ups on SK Hwy 11 between the two cities.

*****

These types of discussions are (or have become) needlessly circular and pointless. One side claims expanded service is viable; the other side says not. Varying degrees of data and analysis are brought to bear, ranging from none to more. Choose your side.

 

[micheal_can]

Is that conclusion based on some manner of analysis or hope? Profitability has to take into account the increase in equipment and staffing plus the expectation of a critical mass of passengers each and every day.

It is based on stuff posted here by @Urban Sky on the profitability of various routes. It is also based on the fact that booking anything on the Canadian during peak can be a challenge.

A bus service. I imagine a decent schedule could be maintained in spite of the massive traffic tie-ups on SK Hwy 11 between the two cities.

The provincial government shut down Saskatchewan Bus. And there are no direct flights.... Herein Northern ON, you can almost fly to the 5 major cities non stop.

These types of discussions are (or have become) needlessly circular and pointless. One side claims expanded service is viable; the other side says not. Varying degrees of data and analysis are brought to bear, ranging from none to more. Choose your side.

Which goes back about a page when people asked about whether I cared that no one comments. I have mixed feelings. Poking holes in a fantasy is good. poking holes in something using incomplete information is not. That whole gravity thing was interesting, but it ignores that there are plans for HxR there.

Because Via is a pubic funded enterprise, we will get all sorts of responses. I try to be pragmatic when it comes to expansion. Keeping things realistic, while looking at if funding was increased, where could it go first to improve passenger rail for more Canadians.

 

[Urban Sky]

Just for the records: none of the self-serving hallucinations presented here by @micheal_can is supported by anything I ever posted. It just shows once again how little he grasps of the facts he is presented here, which makes me wonder why so many people here are still so eagerly responding to him as if it wasn’t the 379th time the same explanations were spoon-fed to him (“gravity model”, anyone?). If he was capable of understanding why he is wrong, he would have already stopped writing the same mind-numbingly boring misconceptions years ago. Maybe we should all remember Einstein’s definition of insanity…

 

[micheal_can]

Just for the records: none of the self-serving hallucinations presented here by @micheal_can is supported by anything I ever posted. It just shows once again how little he grasps of the facts he is presented here, which makes me wonder why so many people here are still so eagerly responding to him as if it wasn’t the 379th time the same explanations were spoon-fed to him (“gravity model”, anyone?). If he was capable of understanding why he is wrong, he would have already stopped writing the same mind-numbingly boring misconceptions years ago. Maybe we should all remember Einstein’s definition of insanity…

You did not post the profitability of each line?

 

[lenaitch]

The provincial government shut down Saskatchewan Bus. And there are no direct flights....

Perhaps the province or the for-profit air carriers figured out that the passenger volume between the two cities presented no viable business model.

Keeping things realistic

Really now.

 

[micheal_can]

Perhaps the province or the for-profit air carriers figured out that the passenger volume between the two cities presented no viable business model.

Perhaps...
I still find it odd that regular, daily flights between cities of a quarter of their population would be viable. I am talking of Timmins, SSM, and North Bay. All of which are further from each other than Saskatoon and Regina, and all with much,much lower population.

 

[micheal_can]

It was mentioned that there are currently 5 trains a day between Montreal and Quebec City. With the future HxR, which is planned to follow the OGR's Trois-Rivieres Sub which is North of the St Lawrence River, what is the expected number of trains a day?

Canada’s High Frequency Rail project begins Request for Proposal phase - Trains

OTTAWA — The Canadian government’s slow-moving process of developing its proposed High-Frequency Rail passenger route between Toronto and Quebec City is taking its next step. Transport Minister Pablo Rodriguez announced Friday the start of the Request for Proposals process for the rail project...

www.trains.com

 

[Urban Sky]

Quick reminder that even in the golden age of VIA (1985-1989), no intercity route outside the Quebec-Windsor Corridor recovered even half of its direct costs, despite most operating daily:

Crosspost from: Amtrak Unlimited forum

The claim that any VIA routes outside the Corridor would likely be profitable if operating daily is as detached from reality as anything else that same person writes here…

 

[lenaitch]

Quick reminder that even in the golden age of VIA (1985-1989), no intercity route outside the Quebec-Windsor Corridor recovered even half of its direct costs, despite most operating daily:

View attachment 596780
Crosspost from: Amtrak Unlimited forum

The claim that any VIA routes outside the Corridor would likely be profitable if operating daily is as detached from reality as anything else that same person writes here…

The 'Rockies By Daylight' service did quite well as well. It sounds like this business model was largely subsumed by Rocky Mountain Rail Tours.

VIA's Canadian Rockies by Daylight

In 1987, VIA Rail Canada under President Lawrence Hanigan became increasingly aware of a need to try new things, in light of continuing...

tracksidetreasure.blogspot.com