so now they have to actually state to what extent they are going to do just that. I will buy that but not a sometime in the future promise to do something. I have bought too many used cars on those types of promises to believe them
and gee whiz all those pesky peasants living there who might otherwise be able to take the train except having a stop midway would ruin the timing for a two hour run. Must keep it for the elites in the big cities (sarcasm)
Well stated. A number of the chiefs of intelligence in Europe are forecasting war within this decade. China is anticipated to go after Taiwan within 5 years. Every planned delivery is for after the war? is underway. What can we start building next year for delivery in less than 5 years that...
and nothing in Quebec. Our 3rd member of the team that is accepting beaucoup de dollars doesn't seem to be giving us much in return. Granted it took the other two a couple of years to start producing but one would hope that by now there would be at least one block under construction in Sorel.
From your Google search: We’re building nearly 1,000 km of electrified rail spanning two provinces, and, importantly, ancestral territories and Treaty lands. Our trains will move at speeds of 300 km/h or more, providing environmentally sound, fast, and reliable service to millions of riders...
but the pen hasn't flicked and most of them have been burnt by the feds too many times to want to risk capital unless it isn't a risk. I think some assurances from Carney that the consultation will be an information session and conditional on their approval would help but having the various...
ball is in Carney's court. There are two issues he has to reverse: the size of the tanker and the industrial carbon levy. Building parallel to Transmountain would add to the congestion in Vancouver harbour and that is the only route open with the constraints on tanker size in the north unless...
and if more than one train a day or whatever were to stop there the cab company just might think that it was worthwhile to meet the train. "you have not because you ask not"
and the government promised a balanced budget......And no I did not give the highways the benefit of the doubt. You really must have struggled in school with your comprehension deficiency. :ROFLMAO:
the survey lines at least delineate the dividing line between landowners. If you can follow one of them the right of way will take 50 meters off adjacent lots without butchering a series of properties. Might be a number of houses to set back or replace but at least the majority of land is...
not at all. With the cost of highways for example I see no reason why they don't primarily follow the lot lines rather than hacking off a chunk of land. Whereas highways may be necessary it should be possible to reduce the upheaval more than they do.
is that entirely true though? Consider that Alto wants 60 meters starting 20 meters beyond the barn. The family is out of business as it eliminates grandpa's entire farm from production. Farms are side by side so there will be no adjacent land that could be attached to the original homestead...
your comment implied that you were open to ensuring that the laws and processes would somehow keep our assets safe from outside interference, thus the statement and it was not a question except in the rhetorical sense. My position is that one is better keeping the enemy and yes I am referring...
and you wouldn't object to a nation with this kind of history of interference being granted financial access to our major potentially strategic assets? (referring to comments on privatization). Laws are only useful to help honest people stay honest and to identify when bad people do bad things
This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.