[jcam]

^ It would be foolish to conceive a GTA bypass proposal without considering and applying the needs and lessons of other major cities eg Winnipeg Regina Saskatoon Calgary Edmonton, for whom the removal of downtown rail lines in favour of bypasses is equally a game changer..... and then add up the cost to the nation to implement all of these. The GTA won't see federal money for this idea without including all of these cities in the plan. Can Ontario go it alone on funding ?
Now add up all the extra miles that such a bypass would add to the routing, and the competitive impact of that added train-mileage and trip time, on CPKC, and the difficulty of establishing a method to equilibrate the "fairness" of this impact between CP and CN. And consider the impact on the valuation of CP's assets.
I really think this idea makes eminent sense, but is a "bridge too far" for our system. While I would not argue for the total expropriation and nationalisation of the rail system, we may benefit from a "key corridors" program whereby all rail corridors in key urban locations are considered public property and/or shared resources, and used on a user pay basis similar to toll highways.

But realistically, this may be a 2060 discussion, when the impacts and befefits feel a bit more urgent.

- Paul

The user pay model would be ideal, if you can make it a wash for rail lines in terms of money....balance the revenue they generate by buying their corridors (current dollars), their avoided future maintenance and capital investment costs (future dollars), with payments (future dollars) and have the Canadian Infrastructure Bank bridge the gap to make it 'bankable'.

 

[lrt's friend]

How many one on one conversations have you had with PP about HFR? I’m probably the only one on this form who has.

Can you tell us what was said? I have met PP a few times but never spoke on this topic.

 

[Urban Sky]

Can you tell us what was said? I have met PP a few times but never spoke on this topic.

If I recall correctly, what PP told him was not that much different from what he says publicly: he finds the idea interesting, but needs more information to determine whether its benefits outweigh the costs to the taxpayer. Far from the ideological hostility some people here seem desperate to interpret into him on this subject…

 

[MisterF]

^ It would be foolish to conceive a GTA bypass proposal without considering and applying the needs and lessons of other major cities eg Winnipeg Regina Saskatoon Calgary Edmonton, for whom the removal of downtown rail lines in favour of bypasses is equally a game changer..... and then add up the cost to the nation to implement all of these. The GTA won't see federal money for this idea without including all of these cities in the plan. Can Ontario go it alone on funding ?

If all federally funded infrastructure projects were held to this standard there would be no federally funded infrastructure projects.

 

[generalcanada]

If I recall correctly, what PP told him was not that much different from what he says publicly: he finds the idea interesting, but needs more information to determine whether its benefits outweigh the costs to the taxpayer. Far from the ideological hostility some people here seem desperate to interpret into him on this subject…

Yea so basicallly what the committeee said. Give up dates and costs and then we will see if its worth it

 

[Urban Sky]

Yea so basicallly what the committeee said. Give up dates and costs and then we will see if its worth it

Which would be a totally reasonable position when you are (soon) trusted with making spending decsisions for billions of taxpayer dollars and have probably (so far) barely more access to project/procurement informations than the overwhelming majority of us here. But anyways, this is what @roger1818 has previously told us about his encounter with PP:

I suspect that I am one of the few people on this forum who has talked to PP on multiple occasions in the past (I am in his riding and pre-pandemic he would come door-to-door about every 6 months). I once asked him about his opinions on HFR about 6 years ago, and at the time he hadn't even heard of it, but his comment was he would want to financially invest in VIA Rail in such a way as to reduce its ongoing subsides.

 

[Mihairokov]

Was VIA more or less woke six years ago compared to now? I find it difficult to imagine CPC in any form supporting billions of dollars for trains.

I have also met Poilievre on more than one occasion but I would consider my interactions to be more misfortune than pleasures.

 

[nfitz]

Was VIA more or less woke six years ago compared to now?

Was VIA more or less woke about what? Racism? Uniforms? Food selection? I don't understanding the question.

 

[crs1026]

If you check out VIA’s annual reports over the last decade, it’s apparent that VIA has paid considerable attention to many themes that are priorities for the standing government policy. I would not define this as “woke”…. It’s simply VIA executing within the context of being a public agency and recognising and aligning to the broader agenda of the government it serves. If a different government comes in with a different agenda, VIA will likely adjust its direction accordingly. No big news here.

- Paul

 

[Mihairokov]

Was VIA more or less woke about what? Racism? Uniforms? Food selection? I don't understanding the question.

I'm making a joke about how far the CPC's policy has fallen in the past six years. Poilievre has stated previously he will replace ""woke culture"" because he's nothing better to do than pander to American culture wars bullshit.

Any one taking him at his word today on any policy is a fool.

 

[just east of the creek]

I'm making a joke about how far the CPC's policy has fallen in the past six years. Poilievre has stated previously he will replace ""woke culture"" because he's nothing better to do than pander to American culture wars bullshit.

Any one taking him at his word today on any policy is a fool.

Conservative Party Public Policy…..see https://cpcassets.conservative.ca/wp-content/uploads/2023/11/23175001/990863517f7a575.pdf. This is about as close to comprehensive as it gets, with the rider, that this document is guidance only. See points 66 and 67 re rail transport.

 

[Urban Sky]

Conservative Party Public Policy…..see https://cpcassets.conservative.ca/wp-content/uploads/2023/11/23175001/990863517f7a575.pdf. This is about as close to comprehensive as it gets, with the rider, that this document is guidance only. See points 66 and 67 re rail transport.

But you don’t understand: it’s not party policy documents or newspaper articles which teach you about a party’s intentions, but some randos’ conspiracy theories on forums like this one… /s

 

[Mihairokov]

Conservative Party Public Policy…..see https://cpcassets.conservative.ca/wp-content/uploads/2023/11/23175001/990863517f7a575.pdf. This is about as close to comprehensive as it gets, with the rider, that this document is guidance only. See points 66 and 67 re rail transport.

This isn't future election policy, simply policy recommended by party members at convention. It's not binding for election policy decision-making.

 

[afransen]

If I recall correctly, what PP told him was not that much different from what he says publicly: he finds the idea interesting, but needs more information to determine whether its benefits outweigh the costs to the taxpayer. Far from the ideological hostility some people here seem desperate to interpret into him on this subject…

This is an artful dodge. Why commit to a position when it has no upside? Remember, he has been a politician his entire adult life. When it comes time to pick between tax cuts and HSR, what do you think he's going to pick? HSR doesn't have a large contingent of supporters. The suburban 905 voters that will secure his majority won't have strong feelings on the subject. Not to say that they are necessarily hostile to it, but spending $15-20B on a HSR project wouldn't outrank other priorities.

 

[Urban Sky]

This is an artful dodge. Why commit to a position when it has no upside? Remember, he has been a politician his entire adult life. When it comes time to pick between tax cuts and HSR, what do you think he's going to pick? HSR doesn't have a large contingent of supporters. The suburban 905 voters that will secure his majority won't have strong feelings on the subject. Not to say that they are necessarily hostile to it, but spending $15-20B on a HSR project wouldn't outrank other priorities.

If you narrow down the options to “true HSR or bust”, then the answer will certainly be the latter. However, I trust the Conservative party to curtail both, the geographical and technological scope, until the taxpayer price tag becomes less offensive. I wouldn’t count on HFR reaching Quebec City or any HSR segment beyond Bonarlaw-Kingston(?)-SMTF to find their way into the initial scope (maybe not even electrification), but I am still optimistic that we’ll end up with something which still is large enough to be a gamechanger, even if it looks very much like the initial scope…