[crs1026]

Once again: the project does not need to be named in the budget. The CIB is already funded.

I suspect it’s more a matter of when they want the political attention. If the budget contained a large infrastructure/stimulus program, they might want it on the list so credit is given. Alternatively, if they are sensitive about the scope of spending, they would bury it elsewhere as a non-government, CIB-driven transaction.

With $70M spent, you can be sure they can’t make it go away. They will have to disclose a decision eventually. But as a matter trapped in the political cycle, it is beginning to look like the container ship in the Suez Canal.....stuck at both ends.

- Paul

 

[Northern Light]

But as a matter trapped in the political cycle, it is beginning to look like the container ship in the Suez Canal.....stuck at both ends.

- Paul

Paul isn't just a fountain of railway knowledge; he's also a master of the metaphor!

 

[nfitz]

Once again: the project does not need to be named in the budget. The CIB is already funded.

Then why did the VIA president say they were hoping for clear support of HFR in the upcoming budget, and were looking for that?

 

[roger1818]

Then why did the VIA president say they were hoping for clear support of HFR in the upcoming budget, and were looking for that?

Do we need to explain the difference between a "hope" and a "need?"

 

[crs1026]

Then why did the VIA president say they were hoping for clear support of HFR in the upcoming budget, and were looking for that?

Because an efffective CEO who is waiting for higher-ups who are slow to make a key decision about their organization's fate, will choose their comments carefully so that the pressure stays on, while staying on-side of their team?

- Paul

 

[nfitz]

Do we need to explain the difference between a "hope" and a "need?"

The question asked was who thinks it's going ahead before the next election. The answer is not only is the VIA CEO looking for it to go ahead before the next election, they are looking for it to go ahead this spring.

I agree it's not totally dead if it doesn't appear in the next budget, given the Covid situation, and that this kind of infrastructure spend announcement might best wait until things are looking brighter, and we aren't in lock down with rising cases. But with no election anticipated until 2022 or later - if there is no announcement (or campaigning on the issue) before the next election date, I think it's dead.

 

[roger1818]

The question asked was who thinks it's going ahead before the next election. The answer is not only is the VIA CEO looking for it to go ahead before the next election, they are looking for it to go ahead this spring.

I agree it's not totally dead if it doesn't appear in the next budget, given the Covid situation, and that this kind of infrastructure spend announcement might best wait until things are looking brighter, and we aren't in lock down with rising cases. But with no election anticipated until 2022 or later - if there is no announcement (or campaigning on the issue) before the next election date, I think it's dead.

If that is the question you are asking, then I agree. I do have hope that it will be in this budget, but also agree that it isn't a slam dunk. If it isn't in the budget, then I also agree that it isn't dead (there are other paths it could take), but the probability of it receiving funding depends on if we hear anything about it from either cabinet or the CIB in the coming months. An election wouldn't necessarily kill it either, but it could very well do significant damage, depending on how things play out. I do think that if HFR fails, the damage to VIA will be critical and its long term viability will be questionable.

 

[2transpo]

https://twitter.com/x/status/1376932135320367112

 

[DirectionNorth]

https://twitter.com/x/status/1376932135320367112

I don't get it. Are you pro or anti HSR?

 

[2transpo]

I don't get it. Are you pro or anti HSR?

I am anti-HFR. As a concept, it is outdated from the very start and isn't worth the money.

 

[Allandale25]

https://twitter.com/x/status/1376932135320367112

A key piece of context is missing with that tweet when talking about HFR. And it's on purpose. Even though the clue is in the tweet itself.

 

[Bordercollie]

Yeah but how reliable was that time table? How often was the train on time?

 

[2transpo]

Beyond questions of reliability, it is worth noting that HFR plans to run diesel trains on a very curvy and slow alignment. Serving Peterborough isn't worth the crazy diversion and slow speed this service will have to make.

 

[Darwinkgo]

Beyond questions of reliability, it is worth noting that HFR plans to run diesel trains on a very curvy and slow alignment. Serving Peterborough isn't worth the crazy diversion and slow speed this service will have to make.

It is worth noting that without a dedicated corridor, the current alignment will get less and less reliable, and consequently, slower.

And until we have the document dump, we don't know how many curves they're thinking of taking out while they do the other work.

 

[Allandale25]

Beyond questions of reliability, it is worth noting that HFR plans to run diesel trains on a very curvy and slow alignment. Serving Peterborough isn't worth the crazy diversion and slow speed this service will have to make.

1) You know full well VIA has given the option to the government to fund the electric version if they want to; and
2) You also know full well this isn't just about 'serving' Peterborough. So a red herring to just mention that.