Liberal Minority Government 2025 - ???

[Halifax Tar]

True!
Another approach to cover off the EV/Hybirds could be 'add' the user fee tax built into the cost of buying new replacement tires. That way you cover off the EV/Hybrid's.

Pay as you go my friend. That's where I'm at.

 

[Brad Sallows]

This after all the banging he's done about getting projects started.

Every public dollar spent benefits someone.

Some public dollars spent don't benefit enough someones.

$90B is in the region of one-sixth of annual federal spending. This for something that cannot allow for detours in the event of closures of parts of it or made available to other users.

If more economic-boosting infrastructure is wanted, build more roads, which can be used by everyone for purposes private and commercial.

 

[suffolkowner]

if we are building a high speed rail run maybe we should build a practice one from Calgary to Edmonton to work the kinks out? Is there demand?
We used to pay all sorts of fees to the Ministries, no it all goes into general revenue same as the gas tax

 

[Czech_pivo]

Every public dollar spent benefits someone.

Some public dollars spent don't benefit enough someones.

$90B is in the region of one-sixth of annual federal spending. This for something that cannot allow for detours in the event of closures of parts of it or made available to other users.

If more economic-boosting infrastructure is wanted, build more roads, which can be used by everyone for purposes private and commercial.

It represents 1/6 of the annual federal spending for a project that represents a geographical catchment area of what % of the population of Canada? Greater than or less than 1/6 of the population?

As an FYI 1/6th is approximately 7million people.

The Greater Toronto-Hamilton area is 8.3 million people
The Greater Peterbourgh arear is 135.000
The Greater Ottawa area is 1.5 million people
The Greater Montreal area is 4.3 million people
The Greater Trois Rivieres area is 140,000k
The Greater Quebec City area is 866.00 people
Total = 8.3m + 135K + 1.5m 4.3m +886k + 140k = 15.2m

This represents greater than 1/3 of the population of Canada, so its under-represented in terms of annual Federal spending.

EDIT: I missed adding Ottawa into my original calcs and Trois Rivieres.

 

[Jarnhamar]

Every public dollar spent benefits someone.

Some public dollars spent don't benefit enough someones.

$90B is in the region of one-sixth of annual federal spending. This for something that cannot allow for detours in the event of closures of parts of it or made available to other users.

If more economic-boosting infrastructure is wanted, build more roads, which can be used by everyone for purposes private and commercial.

You're missing the best part of the high speed rail. With Poilievere speaking out against it that's 3 solid years of Poilievre-HSR stories dominating the news. HSR will also be a great segue for the F35/Gripen experts to migrate to.

 

[brihard]

You're missing the best part of the high speed rail. With Poilievere speaking out against it that's 3 solid years of Poilievre-HSR stories dominating the news. HSR will also be a great segue for the F35/Gripen experts to migrate to.

It’s a bit of a weird one for him to (n o pun intended) rail against. I suspect some of the narrative will be east vs west stuff, why are the laurentian elites getting a fancy train etc… And obviously it’ll get contrasted to the lack of any pipeline project so long as that remains the case.

 

[Czech_pivo]

It’s a bit of a weird one for him to (n o pun intended) rail against. I suspect some of the narrative will be east vs west stuff, why are the laurentian elites getting a fancy train etc… And obviously it’ll get contrasted to the lack of any pipeline project so long as that remains the case.

Why are 15.3m people in the geographic area getting HSR is the question.

 

[PuckChaser]

You're missing the best part of the high speed rail. With Poilievere speaking out against it that's 3 solid years of Poilievre-HSR stories dominating the news. HSR will also be a great segue for the F35/Gripen experts to migrate to.

Also a great soundbite to distract from Carney refusing to acknowledge his new strategic partner is engaging in forced labour.

 

[Jarnhamar]

Also a great soundbite to distract from Carney refusing to acknowledge his new strategic partner is engaging in forced labour.

When you look at the attention anything Poilievre generates compared to unimportant stuff like foreign interference and ethics around our business practices it's easy to see what Canadians are concerned most over.

 

[Czech_pivo]

It’s a bit of a weird one for him to (n o pun intended) rail against. I suspect some of the narrative will be east vs west stuff, why are the laurentian elites getting a fancy train etc… And obviously it’ll get contrasted to the lack of any pipeline project so long as that remains the case.

LOL - so I just looked at the route of the HSR out of Toronto to Ottawa and then out of Ottawa to the Quebec border - not within the city of Toronto or Ottawa.

1) York Durham - riding is held by a Conservative
2) Pickering - riding is held by a Liberal
3) Haliburton-Kawartha - riding is held by a Conservative
4) Hastings-Lennox - riding is held by a Conservative
5) Lanark-Frontenanc - riding is held by a Conservative
6) Carleton - riding is held by a Conservative
7) Prescott - riding is held by a Conservatie

 

[YZT580]

LOL - so I just looked at the route of the HSR out of Toronto to Ottawa and then out of Ottawa to the Quebec border - not within the city of Toronto or Ottawa.

1) York Durham - riding is held by a Conservative
2) Pickering - riding is held by a Liberal
3) Haliburton-Kawartha - riding is held by a Conservative
4) Hastings-Lennox - riding is held by a Conservative
5) Lanark-Frontenanc - riding is held by a Conservative
6) Carleton - riding is held by a Conservative
7) Prescott - riding is held by a Conservatie

Kingston brought up a valid point. Why wouldn't they build down the current transportation corridor and leave the countryside alone? There is lots of room either side of the 401 to put the rail lines and it services the largest population areas. There is no reason to not move the existing system onto a dedicated line that utilizes the 401 as a base. European lines often combine the high speed and local trains on the same trackage. It simply schedules the slower stuff around the HS and does the passing whilst the locals are sitting in the station. Seems to work. Would save the costs of expropriation and open the system up to a larger audience.

 

[Brad Sallows]

It represents 1/6 of the annual federal spending for a project that represents a geographical catchment area of what % of the population of Canada? Greater than or less than 1/6 of the population?

As an FYI 1/6th is approximately 7million people.

The Greater Toronto-Hamilton area is 8.3 million people
The Greater Peterbourgh arear is 135.000
The Greater Ottawa area is 1.5 million people
The Greater Montreal area is 4.3 million people
The Greater Trois Rivieres area is 140,000k
The Greater Quebec City area is 866.00 people
Total = 8.3m + 135K + 1.5m 4.3m +886k + 140k = 15.2m

This represents greater than 1/3 of the population of Canada, so its under-represented in terms of annual Federal spending.

EDIT: I missed adding Ottawa into my original calcs and Trois Rivieres.

Wonderful analysis. Missing: the part that federal spending has to cover a heckuva lot more than jammy rail service for the kinds of people who need a jammy rail service.

 

[GR66]

Kingston brought up a valid point. Why wouldn't they build down the current transportation corridor and leave the countryside alone? There is lots of room either side of the 401 to put the rail lines and it services the largest population areas. There is no reason to not move the existing system onto a dedicated line that utilizes the 401 as a base. European lines often combine the high speed and local trains on the same trackage. It simply schedules the slower stuff around the HS and does the passing whilst the locals are sitting in the station. Seems to work. Would save the costs of expropriation and open the system up to a larger audience.

I'm sure that if it was simply a matter of using the same infrastructure and adjusting the scheduling to accommodate both the high-speed and regular trains then we would have had high-speed rail decades ago.

I make no claims to knowing anything about high-speed rail, but I do recall issues such as the technical specs of the tracks to handle the higher speeds, turn radius limitations, road crossings, electrification vs diesel, etc. all being issues to be resolved.

I don't know enough about the Alto plan in particular to express an opinion on it but while I'm in favour in principle of a high-speed rail link joining the major cities in the Toronto-Quebec corridor as an alternative to air travel it all comes down to the details. What will the total cost end up being? What's the share of that cost between the public and the private partners? What is the expected economic benefit of the link? What will be the cost to use it compared to regular rail or air travel? Is there a plan to allow the Government to recoup the initial investment cost over time...how long? Etc.

 

[CBH99]

if we are building a high speed rail run maybe we should build a practice one from Calgary to Edmonton to work the kinks out? Is there demand?
We used to pay all sorts of fees to the Ministries, no it all goes into general revenue same as the gas tax

There has been some discussion, on and off over the years, about building a high speed line between Calgary & Edmonton (running thru Red Deer - not sure if Lethbridge gets included at first)


Is there demand? Yes, a huge demand.

The business aspect of it will be extremely successful, and it will take a ton of cars off of the QE2

...

Personally I hope it doesn't get built. And as super convenient as it would be, I feel like the cons outweigh the pros (for me anyway)

 

[Czech_pivo]

Kingston brought up a valid point. Why wouldn't they build down the current transportation corridor and leave the countryside alone? There is lots of room either side of the 401 to put the rail lines and it services the largest population areas. There is no reason to not move the existing system onto a dedicated line that utilizes the 401 as a base. European lines often combine the high speed and local trains on the same trackage. It simply schedules the slower stuff around the HS and does the passing whilst the locals are sitting in the station. Seems to work. Would save the costs of expropriation and open the system up to a larger audience.

I can tell you 1 reason NOT to build there - Deseronto

 

[Czech_pivo]

Wonderful analysis. Missing: the part that federal spending has to cover a heckuva lot more than jammy rail service for the kinds of people who need a jammy rail service.

No clue what 'jammy' translates to in your world.

 

[YZT580]

I'm sure that if it was simply a matter of using the same infrastructure and adjusting the scheduling to accommodate both the high-speed and regular trains then we would have had high-speed rail decades ago.

I make no claims to knowing anything about high-speed rail, but I do recall issues such as the technical specs of the tracks to handle the higher speeds, turn radius limitations, road crossings, electrification vs diesel, etc. all being issues to be resolved.

I don't know enough about the Alto plan in particular to express an opinion on it but while I'm in favour in principle of a high-speed rail link joining the major cities in the Toronto-Quebec corridor as an alternative to air travel it all comes down to the details. What will the total cost end up being? What's the share of that cost between the public and the private partners? What is the expected economic benefit of the link? What will be the cost to use it compared to regular rail or air travel? Is there a plan to allow the Government to recoup the initial investment cost over time...how long? Etc.

your points are valid where you are trying to utilize the current system. Starting from scratch means you can get a little more creative. While the idea of high speed is great for a few, providing a system for the rest of the population would be better. Having a reliable rail connection between Trenton and the markets in Oshawa and Kingston for instance: especially with gasoline approaching $2.00 and the driving time steadily getting longer.

 

[Jarnhamar]

How in-demand would this HSR actually be for ferrying people between the Toronto Quebec city corridor? I don't imagine many people are driving between cities every day currently.

I can't see the Public Service unions championing WFH being very supportive of making travel faster and easier.

 

[Seyek]

How in-demand would this HSR actually be for ferrying people between the Toronto Quebec city corridor? I don't imagine many people are driving between cities every day currently.

I can't see the Public Service unions championing WFH being very supportive of making travel faster and easier.

Driving, maybe not a lot, but probably more than we'd think. I've driven to and from Toronto area to Ottawa and Montreal a few times. My brother travels at least regularly between the area and Montreal, he currently flies. I think replacing flights and existing rail service is where you'll see a big uptake in passengers. A convenient and fast service can potentially attract more usage.

Some quick googling shows about 3k passengers flying between Toronto and Montreal daily. Another 3-4k passengers travel via train.

I like the idea of the HSR line, and I'd like more and better transit projects in Canada in general, I have very little faith in our ability to successfully execute such a project in a timely affordable manner. If the project ended up taking 25 years and costing $200+ billion to run only a handful of trains I wouldn't even be surprised.

 

[lenaitch]

It’s a bit of a weird one for him to (n o pun intended) rail against. I suspect some of the narrative will be east vs west stuff, why are the laurentian elites getting a fancy train etc… And obviously it’ll get contrasted to the lack of any pipeline project so long as that remains the case.

And considering support for passenger rail, including high-speed rail, is part of the CPC policy book.

The problem with on-time reliability of the current VIA lakeshore service is it subservient to CN freight. Since that is their money maker, CN is not going to agree to give passenger trains priority. We can't compare this to European mixed passenger-freight rail because the amount of tonnage we move compared to Europe is orders of magnitude higher.

They can't run high-speed rail in the current CN corridor, even if there was room - which there isn't - because the alignment of the corridor (curves grades, clearances, etc.) doesn't support high-speed trains, so even if they could expropriate the corridor wider, it still wouldn't work. Even without that, expropriation along or adjacent to the CN corridor would be horribly expensive. Towns and cities have grown up along the tracks as they have in just about every country. That's about as looney as some politicians suggesting that it should be run down the 401.

Unless it was a separate right-of-way, it is still going to be a tenant operation in a corridor owned by CN and is still going to be constrained by their operation rules. Both CN and CPKC are adamantly opposed to electrification of their corridors. Neither railway will idly sit by and accept any change or imposition that threatens their profitability.

If ALTO goes with their proposed northern alignment (very roughly following the former Ontario-Quebec Railway right-of-way), the good news is the area is much less densely populated; the bad news is the area is much less densely populated. Regardless, the point of ALTO is not to serve local needs; it is to improve travel between large population centres. 'They have promised (ya, I know) that local VIA service will continue along the CN corridor.

To hear the people howling about this, one wonders how the 401 or Seaway could ever have been built today.