News   GLOBAL  |  Apr 02, 2020
 9.7K     0 
News   GLOBAL  |  Apr 01, 2020
 41K     0 
News   GLOBAL  |  Apr 01, 2020
 5.5K     0 

Finalizing the right of way between Smiths Falls and Toronto Union and right of way acquisition? Seems to me the next steps.

There’s really no reason to convey the land until procurement has been completed, and that is only promised to start this fall. I would hope for tackling whatever long-lead items create risk (and hence higher bid price) for the RFP.. That might well mean working with CN/CP to upgrade their lines especially through Montreal choke points. That work won’t be part of the bid process. And it’s mostly needed/valuable even if HFR somehow fell through.
For that matter, an early start on the Ottawa-Montreal portion, which is a low ticket price proposition, might generate quick gains that could be used to rebut any lingering opposition.
Putting a token service through Trois Rivieres might be a political priority even without track improvement, a la GO to London.
Or maybe there’s urgency for a down payment on further trainset orders. Or track material and signal procurement.
- Paul
 
Last edited:
The NDP will not stop any funding for VIA and in fact will probably demand much more especially with HFR.

The NDP got a paltry 3 seats in all of Southern Ontario.........1 in Hamilton, 1 in London, and 1 in Windsor........right along the Southern Corridor route where any extension for HFR would take place especially now that the London/KW Northern route will be getting GO. Singh will demand more funding in order to serve SWO to make the case in the next election that is was them who forced the Liberals to extend HFR to their ridings. The Liberals will go along with it as they got seats in all 3 cities.
 
The NDP will not stop any funding for VIA and in fact will probably demand much more especially with HFR.

I didn't say anything about stopping funding. I think they have a habit of subversive for the sake of politics. This is what I'm referring to.

They'll announce more ambitious ideas with no real plans to get there. Climate change is a good example of this. Liberals say 35-40% emissions cut by 2030 with a fully fleshed out policy plan on how to get there. NDP says that's not enough and they'll do more and give the Liberals a rough ride on the LPC plan while having no real depth to the NDP plan. They thought they could get away with this until climate scientists and policy experts called them out and a former BC Greens leader endorsed the Liberal plan.

I am weary of similar behaviour on the infrastructure plan. They can simply stall and oppose HFR on the grounds that it is not HSR and involves the CIB (an institution they dislike). And they can do this, because as an opposition party they don't have to offer a credible alternative. I hope I'm wrong. But till we have shovels in the ground I'll be really worried about politicians politicking.
 
I didn't say anything about stopping funding. I think they have a habit of subversive for the sake of politics. This is what I'm referring to.

They'll announce more ambitious ideas with no real plans to get there. Climate change is a good example of this. Liberals say 35-40% emissions cut by 2030 with a fully fleshed out policy plan on how to get there. NDP says that's not enough and they'll do more and give the Liberals a rough ride on the LPC plan while having no real depth to the NDP plan. They thought they could get away with this until climate scientists and policy experts called them out and a former BC Greens leader endorsed the Liberal plan.

I am weary of similar behaviour on the infrastructure plan. They can simply stall and oppose HFR on the grounds that it is not HSR and involves the CIB (an institution they dislike). And they can do this, because as an opposition party they don't have to offer a credible alternative. I hope I'm wrong. But till we have shovels in the ground I'll be really worried about politicians politicking.

There is a way around that - go for BQ (I know, I know) support instead.

AoD
 
Heck, even the CPC said they wanted to accelerate HFR.

Wait did they want to accelerate HFR, or did they want to accelerate HFR?

Kind of ironic that the work that would be needed to make HFR faster would lengthen its construction time. They are mutually unexclusive!
 
Wait did they want to accelerate HFR, or did they want to accelerate HFR?

Kind of ironic that the work that would be needed to make HFR faster would lengthen its construction time. They are mutually unexclusive!

LOL. My understanding was they wanted to accelerate the construction of HFR, not accelerate the trains.
 
Nobody knows how sincere they were or how they would react to unforeseen (but predictable) increases in cost.

In any event, the election is done. We get to see how serious the Liberals are.

You are right and we don’t know how sincere the CPC was, but we do know how sincere the LPC is, given how much progress they have made on the file over the past 5 years. I guess better the devil you know than the devil you don’t. I figure now we will most likely have a fully costed plan in 4 years for the LPC to go to the polls for a mandate on.
 
Last edited:
I can't recall. Has VIA or the government said how many new trips HFR will provide between Toronto and Ottawa/Montreal? I don't see it on VIA's website.

 
I can't recall. Has VIA or the government said how many new trips HFR will provide between Toronto and Ottawa/Montreal? I don't see it on VIA's website.


I think we have mostly assumed hourly, because the portion east of Toronto is pretty close to hourly already and VIA is promising better under HFR.

However - Try pp35+ of VIA's 2018-2022 Corporate Plan - which certainly leaves that impression.

Screen Shot 2021-09-23 at 9.34.08 PM.png


Screen Shot 2021-09-23 at 9.39.40 PM.png


Earlier VIA fact sheets referred to "three times as many departures" which certainly approaches hourly service throughout the HFR catchment.

- Paul
 

Back
Top