[smallspy]

It looks like a lot of others thought same Alex:
"Due to technical difficulties, this rail pass is temporarily unavailable. Stay tuned for more updates."

I suspect the site was swamped.

That's exactly what has happened. The website has crashed a number of times over the past 24 hours due to the demand.

Dan
Toronto, Ont.

 

[steveintoronto]

Of all the "projects" that the Government has talked about for celebrating the 150th year of this nation, this strikes me as *by far* being the best. In my youth....back in the 1800s...(actually the 60s/70s) it was a 'rite of passage' (make that a 'right of passage' now) to travel the nation and the US, if not more. I did it hitchhiking, but I wouldn't recommend that now-days.

For $150 bucks...I'd be camped out in line to get one of these. I think Trudeau should take note of this and propose a special subsidy to VIA, and put it to Parliament (I dare any Party to vote against this and see what it costs you!) to add on extra cars to those routes oversubscribed. It might even take extra trains. Even run at a loss, it would be an incredible investment for the future of this nation.

We had our Festival Express https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Festival_Express which would be difficult if not impossible to do now-days, especially in light of the financial disaster it was (I had close friends involved in setting this up, there was a spirit then now absent), but VIA can certainly be helped to maximize the immense benefit that 'Youth Meeting Canada' can have for this nation.

 

[steveintoronto]

High demand halts sale of $150 cross-Canada VIA Rail passes

Josh Elliott, CTVNews.ca
Published Wednesday, March 29, 2017 10:38AM EDT
Last Updated Wednesday, March 29, 2017 11:46AM EDT


A VIA Rail promotion offering young passengers unlimited Canada-wide travel for $150 has gone off the rails, with sales temporarily suspended due to a technical issue triggered by "high demand."

The Canada 150 Pass was not available for purchase on Via Rail's website Wednesday, due to what the website called "technical difficulties." A spokesperson says the issue was caused by the unexpected popularity of the promotion.

"VIA Rail's technical teams are working to find the source of the problem," the company said in a statement. The company apologized to customers for the inconvenience, adding that "technical teams are working to find the source of the problem."

The site is still accepting bookings from existing pass holders.

The $150 youth pass allows international students and passengers aged between 12-25 to book as many train rides as they want in July, as part of Canada's 150th anniversary celebrations.

VIA Rail introduced the pass on Feb. 7, with Minister of Transport Marc Garneau on hand for the announcement at an Ottawa train station. "The government of Canada is proud to participate in initiatives that contribute to making 2017 an exception and memorable year," Garneau is quoted as saying in a VIA Rail news release.

"VIA Rail is surprised by Canadians' enthusiasm to take part in the Canada 150 celebrations, and the popularity of the product," VIA Rail said on Wednesday.

The offer is certainly an enticing opportunity for young Canadians with a touch of wanderlust. Pass holders can travel from coast-to-coast in economy class if they so desire, with stops in nearly every province except Prince Edward Island and Newfoundland and Labrador.

VIA Rail requires valid government-issued ID to prove that passengers are between 12-25 when taking each trip. However, Individuals over 25 can still take advantage of the deal with a valid International Student Identification Card.

CTVNews.ca has reached out to VIA Rail to determine when the passes will be available again.

http://www.ctvnews.ca/canada/high-demand-halts-sale-of-150-cross-canada-via-rail-passes-1.3345615

 

[crs1026]

I wonder what if anything VIA can do to add coach capacity to the transcon trains to walk the talk on this.

I'm showing my age, but a CN student pass and coach travel pretty much made my college years' travels what they were - for much of my generation, in fact.

- Paul

 

[kEiThZ]

Well, no. The $29B deficit is a deficit not seen since 2010 ($33.4B) or 2009 ($55.6B). Let's not lose our heads.

As others have pointed out context matters. Running a deficit during recessionary times is good policy. Deficit spending when interest rates are low and there is no recession, is only good policy under one condition: where it boosts productivity. Hardly any of the Liberals deficits spending falls in that category given that the bulk of their deficits are doing towards social spending, not infrastructure. In essence, they're boosting quality of life by putting the spending on their line of credit, with no discernible long term improvement. If they were honest, they'd raise taxes to cover this. They are, however, politically brilliant. Some future (probably Conservative) government is going to have to make big cuts or hike taxes, which will not be popular.

First: You and I have had respectful exchanges in the past; having read my past posts you should know well they are never ill informed, or poorly thought out; I focus overwhelmingly on post quality, not quantity; while once in a while indulging in overt opinion, always stated as such.

Your tone in your response was disrespectful and unmerited, and betrays you as not having read past funding agreements, or being familiar w/the process by which they operate. I work closely w/gov't and have for many years...............

***

Second, the article clearly states that applications for specific projects are NOT to be taken in until funding agreements are finalized.

In other words there are no business cases for any projects until such time as the over-arching funding agreements are completed.

Something the articles suggests will run well into 2018.

At no time did I suggest that individual applications not be subject to scrutiny and merit-based award. You're reading into that is entirely unreasonable, you didn't read the article!

The article may have it wrong, but that is the way it reads.

***

I did suggest that 'criteria' might be tweaked to favour certain projects; which not only can happen, but does happen under governments of all political stripes.

Its not ideal; it shouldn't be that way, it was, it is, and it shall be well into the foreseeable future.

The list of examples based on publicly available information is nearly endless.

Regardless, my point was that it doesn't take that long to figure out what will be 'pushed' through the envelope.

Of course the comprehensive list, and subsequent processes (tenders etc.) will take a good deal longer. My argument was that the pre-process is bloated.

***

I would also suggest, for the most part, that projects that already been vetted by 2 levels of gov't needed have that process rehashed by a third.

The Federal government really shouldn't be in the business of determined which subways should the priority in Toronto; Toronto should, and Ontario can be the 'double-check'.

The Scarborough Subway does indeed provide a pertinent example that a third party doesn't actually change the outcome. (for better or worse)

Toronto may well fail in correctly picking its priorities, but that simply is not Ottawa's problem.

In all my time on this forum, I've only blocked one person. I suggest you do the same. The mods aren't bothered to correct him at all. And he doesn't add much other than spamming a wall of links and insinuating that he has inside information (he claimed that before the budget about the HFR launch.....). So why tolerate such incivility. Set him up ignore. If you feel like indulging, you can take the filter off occasionally and remind yourself why you ignored him.

 

[TOareaFan]

Totally agree. It might be easier to just build a people mover system from the terminal to the train station though. The can even route close it to the hotels and put a station there.

if they simply moved the train station 800m to the west, they could run a people mover or, even, moving sidewalk straight into the airport from there.

 

[steveintoronto]

I wonder what if anything VIA can do to add coach capacity to the transcon trains to walk the talk on this.

I'm showing my age, but a CN student pass and coach travel pretty much made my college years' travels what they were - for much of my generation, in fact.

- Paul

Ottawa has rejected majority of Canada 150 projects
Daniel Leblanc and Chris Hannay
OTTAWA — The Globe and Mail
Published Tuesday, Mar. 21, 2017 7:17PM EDT

The initiative of Alex' generation to subscribe to this is incredibly encouraging, this is a golden opportunity for his gen to do what was easier for us back then, easier not least because it was 'the thing to do' and as a nation, we can't waste this incredible opportunity to get even more behind the VIA program.

Note the paucity of vision in the following suggested and approved schemes:

Getting federal funds to organize community celebrations for Canada’s 150th anniversary is proving to be a hard task.

New numbers show that the federal government has rejected a majority of the 3,285 applications it has received from artists, community groups and entrepreneurs looking for money for Canada 150 ideas.

To this point, 365 projects have been approved (11 per cent), 1,883 have been rejected (57 per cent) and 1,037 (32 per cent) are still under review, according to federal data provided to The Globe and Mail.

The projects that have been approved so far include an urban game of snakes and ladders in Calgary ($416,000), a giant puppet show in the West Kootenays ($30,000) and installing an immense flag atop a 15-storey pole in Windsor, Ont., at a cost of $150,000.

The federal funds do not reflect the total cost of the projects, which also require money from sources such as municipal grants and private donations.

With this support, the federal government is hoping to foster a festive atmosphere throughout Canada in 2017, while promoting the country’s history, diversity, creativity and innovative spirit. [...]

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news...ority-of-canada-150-projects/article34378649/

"Urban snakes and ladders"....WTF? For much of today's youth, just looking for a job fits that description. Before any more of that money is spent, and to save putting a Bill before Parliament (it couldn't be rostered in time for pending recess) a special dispensation by the Minister (Garneau)(Order in Council) should be made to VIA to harness this massive demand to allow VIA to rapidly prepare or lease-in extra rolling stock to handle this. I believe VIA has some coaches idle awaiting disposal that could be pressed back into service specifically to cater to the load. Seats in rough shape? Hey, it won't bother the crowd this caters to, most are going to be so intoxicated with the thrill of seeing the country. Some co-ordination will be needed to make sure that some stations and destinations can handle the flow in a measured way, but this is an opportunity *as demonstrated by demand* that can't be wasted.

And compared to snakes and ladders, twiddly-winks, and flaccid floss...the costs to VIA, underwritten as a special once-off appropriation, better any of the suggestions submitted to Canada 150 by a railway mile.

I hope someone in the VIA hierarchy is thinking same. Maybe Urban Sky could pass a message up the chain of command to have the Powers That Be make an application for this?

Edit to Add:

According to a statement on Via's website the special projects are "designed to strengthen the pride and sense of belonging felt across our country."

In light of the announcement, Minister of Canadian Heritage, Mélanie Joly said, "I encourage everyone to travel across the country to take part in activities from coast to coast to coast to celebrate Canada's linguistic, cultural and regional diversity, as well as its rich history and heritage."

http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/toronto/via-rail-deal-1.4045589

 

[kEiThZ]

Totally agree. It might be easier to just build a people mover system from the terminal to the train station though. The can even route close it to the hotels and put a station there.

Very true. I've hiked with a suitcase from the station to my hotel. Annoying. I wish they had a people mover like Pearson.

That whole station is crap design come to think of it. No tourist would intuitively know where to go. I couldn't figure out where to catch a cab and all gone by the time I did.

 

[steveintoronto]

I see Keithz was 'kind enough' to point out the ways of my era...or is it 'error of my ways'? Whatever:

Second, the article clearly states that applications for specific projects are NOT to be taken in until funding agreements are finalized.

In other words there are no business cases for any projects until such time as the over-arching funding agreements are completed.

Something the articles suggests will run well into 2018.

At no time did I suggest that individual applications not be subject to scrutiny and merit-based award. You're reading into that is entirely unreasonable, you didn't read the article!

The article may have it wrong, but that is the way it reads.

I have posted more news releases since this. And yesterday the announcement that Bruce McCuaig is to be taken-on as an "advisor"...a rather nebulous description, probably due to the corporate framework still be configured. But what is of unmistakable importance is McCuaig's rail background as CEO at Metrolinx.

Morneau has mentioned an impending announcement in April for funding transportation projects. Whether that comes to pass or not only time will tell. I'll try and find the reference again and post it.

I would also suggest, for the most part, that projects that already been vetted by 2 levels of gov't needed have that process rehashed by a third.

The Federal government really shouldn't be in the business of determined which subways should the priority in Toronto; Toronto should, and Ontario can be the 'double-check'.

The Scarborough Subway does indeed provide a pertinent example that a third party doesn't actually change the outcome. (for better or worse)

Toronto may well fail in correctly picking its priorities, but that simply is not Ottawa's problem.

This is where we totally agree, except in outcome:

"The Scarborough Subway does indeed provide a pertinent example that a third party doesn't actually change the outcome. (for better or worse)".

I think there might be a real shocker on that one. Only $660,000 has been committed by the Feds for the SSE. It seems to me, by exactly the the third stage vetting you detail, that they can now state: (gist) "Your project is only 5% designed so far, with a projected completion date a decade away at best, and we've committed $660,000 to you so far, any further committed funds must come through the Investment Bank and vetting process to see whether there's a bona-fide business case to indicate a substantial enough (1.5:1) return on investment. We assume you appreciate that by this coming from the Investment Bank, it's not a political decision on our part, but a business one".

And that is how the federal taxpayer is protected....and rightly so. And I'll state again: I defy any persons to the Right of Centre to take issue with a"business case".

Toronto City Council live in a wonderful dream with other peoples' monies. And who will be next to turn them down? How about Queen's Park? But that's for the SSE string. QP now have the out they need to say "No".

 

[steveintoronto]

Well, no great surprise here, it's got to be Toronto, and that's not politics talking to make that so, it's *investors themselves*! This has to be based on best business practice and mutual benefit for all concerned...and what a relief that will be for many sensible projects! Desjardins-Siciliano has done his homework on this long before the Investment Bank was touted. If D-S is guilty of anything, it's foresight. And not to be-labour the point, but REM getting into difficulties is actually a good thing in the long-run for VIA. VIA will have the HFR concept vetted and vetted again, and probably fine-tuned on a number of points in the process, simply because all involved will want a good outcome. This is going to be a 'feather in the cap' for all concerned to do more projects based on its success.

Just up today: (recognize the name for her scathing piece on VIA some time back?)

Yedlin: Infrastructure bank announcement appears to throw cold water on Calgary's chances
Deborah Yedlin, Calgary Herald
More from Deborah Yedlin, Calgary Herald
Published on: March 29, 2017 | Last Updated: March 29, 2017 5:00 AM MDT
One day after federal Finance Minister Bill Morneau’s visit to Calgary that included meetings with Mayor Naheed Nenshi and Calgary Economic Development officials, Bruce McCaig was named executive adviser to the federal government regarding its plans to establish the Canada Infrastructure Bank.

Since 2010, McCaig had been at the helm of Toronto-based Metrolinx, the Ontario government agency that oversees the transportation infrastructure of that province’s Golden Horseshoe, which includes the Toronto and Hamilton regions. During his tenure, more than $21 billion in transit infrastructure upgrades were made to subway and transit services.

In other words, he knows infrastructure.

The announcement that someone from Toronto is taking the role as senior adviser doesn’t necessarily throw Calgary out of the running to become home to the infrastructure bank, but it does feel a bit like the city has just been doused with a bucket of ice water.

That, and the fact another person from Toronto is advising the federal government rather than looking west for input, isn’t exactly encouraging.

There are some with the view that Toronto — as Canada’s financial centre and home to three of the country’s largest pension funds — the Canada Pension Plan and Investment Board, Ontario Teachers and the Ontario Municipal Employees Retirement System (OMERS) — should be the bank’s headquarters. They also point out it’s also where successful public-private partnerships have been structured and where the country’s largest insurance companies are based, in addition to private-sector entities such as Brookfield, which also actively invests in infrastructure.

That may be true, but when it comes to the design, engineering, construction and financing of large infrastructure projects, Alberta — and Calgary — is where the action has been for the better part of two decades.

As Senator Doug Black said when he rose in the Senate earlier this month to make the case for Calgary as the infrastructure bank’s headquarters, this city has been the centre for financial innovation since the 1950s.

In other words, there is room for more than one financial centre in this country, and Calgary is the logical choice.

Were it not for the financial structures such as the sophisticated project finance, junior capital pools, special warrant private placements and the royalty trust structure that were developed in Calgary, capital formation for the energy sector would have looked much different.

And the oilsands growth took it to a much higher level.

According to Alberta government figures, investment in the infrastructure-heavy oilsands totalled $201 billion between 1999 and 2013, a time when production grew from 600,000 barrels a day to almost two million barrels a day. Current production is 2.4 million barrels a day.

No other province in the country has seen infrastructure investments of that magnitude — and that is in only one segment of the Alberta economy.

The federal government has said it wants to leverage the $35 billion that will be provided to the infrastructure bank on a 5:1 basis, using capital provided from the private sector and pension funds. That would put it at $175 billion — much less than what has been invested in the oilsands since 1999.

Not only are these projects complex, requiring a wide array of skills, they are designed to operate in a less than friendly climate.

And it’s not just oil and gas. [...I can't bear to read any more of this...]

http://calgaryherald.com/business/e...pears-to-throw-cold-water-on-calgarys-chances

Calgary...on de Nile.

I knew this was going to happen, and it's been discussed in business circles and the business press, and with *very few exceptions* (if any) the consensus is "It has to be Toronto"...and that's from those that invest and represent investors.

The truly odd thing about much of the flak on the Investment Bank is coming from those who claim to be "Conservatives". Really? I remember when (after the Seventies, anyway) "Conservative" was synonymous with "Capitalism". Seems those knocking knees are chattering so loud now, it drowns out common-sense.

Yedlin writes on McCuaig
"In other words, he knows infrastructure" Well gosh-golly-gee there Debbie, he's a career mandarin, and knows a hell of a lot more about rail than your overweight suitcases will ever know! This isn't to build pipelines, investors are running away from that right now in Canada, even Cdn pipeline operators are moving investment south, not that Debbie would notice. McCuaig's forté is to build transportation, especially passenger rail, and operate it.

Yedlin: Via Rail operations remain stuck in the past | Calgary Herald
calgaryherald.com › Business › Energy
Feb 9, 2017 -

 

[steveintoronto]

Updated: March 29, 2017 8:23 pm
Via Rail resumes sale of all-you-can-travel Canada 150 Youth Pass after ‘technical difficulties’
By Tania Kohut National Online Journalist, Breaking News Global News

Note: This story has been updated to reflect that Via Rail will spend over $2 million in various initiatives as part of Canada 150 celebrations which is unrelated to the Canada 150 Youth Pass.

Via Rail has resumed selling its Canada 150 Youth Pass after a day-long delay due to high demand.

The national rail service says customers sales could still be delayed intermittently. Via Rail promised to provide more information once the situation was resolved.

“Due to a persistent instability of our reservation system and higher traffic on our website, you may experience delays during your purchasing process,” the website reads. [...]

http://globalnews.ca/news/3342909/via-rail-canada-150-youth-pass/

 

[steveintoronto]

Montreal LRT is first test for Ottawa’s private sector infrastructure plans
Bill Curry and Greg Keenan

OTTAWA and TORONTO — The Globe and Mail
Published Wednesday, Mar. 29, 2017 7:25PM EDT

A massive new light-rail project in Montreal is shaping up as Ottawa’s first test of its plan to raise billions from private investors, but Quebec is pushing for a federal commitment well before a new Canada Infrastructure Bank will be running.

This week’s Quebec budget revealed for the first time how a $6-billion proposal by Quebec’s pension fund, the Caisse de dépôt et placement du Québec, would be structured.

Known as the REM, the 67-kilometre-long light-rail line would connect downtown Montreal to several suburbs and the Trudeau international airport. Quebec wants construction to start this fall, with passenger service in place by the end of 2020.

The Caisse would put up $2.67-billion and assume the construction, operation and ridership risks for the project in exchange for an 8-per-cent return on its investment. If returns exceed that amount, dividends are then divided according to formulas that eventually lead to a distribution based on each party’s equity stake in the project, proposed as 51 per cent for the Caisse and 24.5 per cent each for Quebec and Ottawa. Quebec is proposing that each government put forward $1.3-billion. Ottawa has not formally agreed to fund the project but has made supportive comments about it in recent days.

“This falls right into the wheelhouse of the proposed role of the infrastructure bank,” said C.D. Howe Institute researcher Benjamin Dachis, who released a paper this week on options for the infrastructure bank.

“Now it’s a matter of whether this is a sort of thing that feeds into the bank or if it’s too soon for the bank to make a decision,” he said. “The thing is, this is the right idea … The Caisse is one of the major transportation infrastructure owners around the world.”

It was also revealed this week that Toronto’s Pearson airport is making a multibillion-dollar pitch to become a transportation megahub.

Both projects could serve as early test cases for how pension funds and private investors can help fund major new Canadian infrastructure projects.
[...]
Brook Simpson, a spokesman for federal Infrastructure Minister Amarjeet Sohi, said Ottawa has the ability to approve specific projects even though its full, long-term infrastructure plan has not yet launched.

“We will be able to meet their required timelines,” he said in an e-mail in relation to the REM light-rail plan.

Meanwhile, Toronto’s Pearson International Airport has prepared a detailed policy paper on how a partial privatization of the airport could raise funds toward as much as $12.6-billion in new local and regional public transit that connects to the airport.

The plan proposes a $6-billion high-speed rail line connecting Windsor, London, Kitchener-Waterloo and Toronto. The airport suggests high-speed rail would reduce the need for short-haul flights, freeing up runway capacity for more long-haul international flights.

The Globe and Mail obtained a copy of the 39-page report, dated January, 2017, and marked confidential. The report has not been made public but its content was first reported Tuesday by the Toronto Star.
[...]

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news...-sector-infrastructure-plans/article34482281/

Note: "Brook Simpson, a spokesman for federal Infrastructure Minister Amarjeet Sohi, said Ottawa has the ability to approve specific projects even though its full, long-term infrastructure plan has not yet launched." That was specifically regarding REM, but applies generally.

*Guaranteed* that Desjardins-Siciliano is polishing his notes.

 

[Northern Light]

https://www.thestar.com/business/20...d-out-after-high-demand-interrupts-sales.html

Really surprised that VIA underestimated demand by so much; it really is a very good deal.

I get the '1867' choice as a cut-off from a marketing perspective.

However, f they could possibly have put out more coaches and runs I think this would have been
not only a superb political win and relatively low cost, but great for VIA's longer term prospects.

 

[jcam]

This is where we totally agree, except in outcome:

"The Scarborough Subway does indeed provide a pertinent example that a third party doesn't actually change the outcome. (for better or worse)".

I think there might be a real shocker on that one. Only $660,000 has been committed by the Feds for the SSE. It seems to me, by exactly the the third stage vetting you detail, that they can now state: (gist) "Your project is only 5% designed so far, with a projected completion date a decade away at best, and we've committed $660,000 to you so far, any further committed funds must come through the Investment Bank and vetting process to see whether there's a bona-fide business case to indicate a substantial enough (1.5:1) return on investment. We assume you appreciate that by this coming from the Investment Bank, it's not a political decision on our part, but a business one".

And that is how the federal taxpayer is protected....and rightly so. And I'll state again: I defy any persons to the Right of Centre to take issue with a"business case".

Toronto City Council live in a wonderful dream with other peoples' monies. And who will be next to turn them down? How about Queen's Park? But that's for the SSE string. QP now have the out they need to say "No".

I made this comment in the SSE thread - with Federal funds now going through the bank, apples to apples comparisons (in the form of VFM options analyses) for technologies, alignments, etc. in transit expansion projects will hopefully 'force' municipal politicians to understand that they won't be allowed into the big pot of money without well reasoned and supported cases for their projects. (i.e. no more SSEs)

 

[steveintoronto]

I made this comment in the SSE thread - with Federal funds now going through the bank, apples to apples comparisons (in the form of VFM options analyses) for technologies, alignments, etc. in transit expansion projects will hopefully 'force' municipal politicians to understand that they won't be allowed into the big pot of money without well reasoned and supported cases for their projects. (i.e. no more SSEs)

Very short on time here, but had to log on to cross-reinforce your point. I look forward to your furthering that in more discussion. It's an odd thing, this will actually *relieve* a lot of politicos from have to say "No" politically, because it isn't a political decision, it's a business based one. And if someone disagrees with that, then put it in writing for a review if deemed appropriate by the investment board.

Canada is on the cusp of making some world-class investment decisions. VAST amounts of *our own* capital is flowing overseas, where collectively we can state "yes" or "no" purely on the basis of cold reasoned decision. As it should be, with some caveats...because we are human.

It's time for that same approach in our own nation, the capital is there, in droves, per capita, Canada is one of the most endowed in retirement funds in the world, and even in absolute terms too.

That capital is *ours* and it's well past time to put it to our own use.

Must run, looking forward to more discussion on this. The time for a separate Investment Bank string might have arrived, and what we can do is focus on the VIA and related infrastructure aspect in this string, and discuss the *investment theory and application/practice* in another.