Three points before I go to work now:
#1
There are other issues with a Peterborough route that no one is discussing: much of it is in the middle of nowhere.
Now this is fine for express service with no stops in between, but it is not good from a safety perspective.
What if a train derails in the dead of january? I could just see the headline: "VIA passengers die due to non existent emergency services"
I’ve spent less than 20 minutes on Google (search: “fire station near [village name] Ontario”) and found fire stations all along the Havelock subdivision, which is mostly covered by a 10 km radius and always covered by a 20 km radius. For larger emergencies, there are always the hospitals in Perth, Belleville and Peterborough and helicopters to transport critically injured people. If you have a look at the Kingston subdivision, you will also be able to identify sections which run through forests with no road near. Also, accidents tend to happen at level crossings (thanks to the recklessness of far too many road users), which are by definition accessible to road-based emergency vehicles. Anyways, all of the fire symbols below represent a fire station near the Havelock subdivision:
Despite this rather desperate attempt, you all present valid concerns of varying severity and relevance, which would have to be overcome if the Havelock subdivision was to be chosen, which again: I can neither confirm nor dismiss as VIA Rail’s intent. However, if you dismiss the Havelock subdivision so easily, you'd need a similarly throughout and critical analysis of whatever alternative alignments are available. For starters, this is a map of all ROWs between Toronto and the Brockville subdivision, which is already owned for VIA and you can use Paul Delamere’s excellent
The Ontario Railway Map Collection Google Earth file:
#2
Some of you have already commented on the report of the auditor general and I have struggle to reconcile the feedback I heard so far with the report I read:
Opinion To the Board of Directors of VIA Rail Canada Inc.:
1. In my opinion, based on the criteria established, there is reasonable assurance that during the period covered by the examination there were no significant deficiencies in VIA Rail Canada Inc.’s systems and practices that we selected for examination, except for the significant deficiency in governance, as described in the following paragraph. The systems and practices in all other areas we examined were maintained in a manner that provides VIA Rail Canada Inc. (VIA or the Corporation) with reasonable assurance that its assets are safeguarded and controlled, its resources are managed economically and efficiently, and its operations are carried out effectively.
Findings that support the opinion
2. Corporate governance. Overall, we found that there was a significant deficiency in VIA’s governance, despite the good practices identified in this area. We found that VIA had made efforts to define a long-term strategic direction. However, despite its efforts, the Corporation still had no long-term plan or direction approved by the federal government. For a number of years, VIA has received from the government only short-term approval of its funding and five-year corporate plan, and often late in the Corporation’s fiscal year. In this context, VIA could not fulfill its mandate as economically, efficiently, and effectively as desired. The significant deficiency could also compromise the Corporation’s medium- and long-term viability.
[…]
These first two paragraphs set the tone for the entire report. Furthermore, the report makes an important point which could be used in favor of a dedicated infrastructure, even though it does not mention it directly:
To summarize: the federal government had approved to give CN $251 million through VIA Rail’s capital expenditure budget to triple-track 160 km of the Kingston subdivision, in order to receive 14 additional trains, reduce travel time, improve OTP and generate additional revenues and ridership. In the end, the project ran almost 50% over budget, while the scope was reduced to less than half, resulting in a tripling of the per-mile costs and no improvement on any performance criteria (even worse: OTP and ridership decreased even further). I will let you do the math do extrapolate how much it might cost to ask CN to triple-track the remainder of the approximately 500 km of the Kingston subdivision they still own and imagine what operational benefits may be secured...
#3
My stance in this particular instance of the
Steve vs the rest of this forum debate is that even though I don’t endorse his taste of humor,
I agree with Mister F that nfitz was the bully in this situation, arbitrarily insulting people as “
Idiots” and “
liars” before then
shamelessly playing the victim and resorted to
personal attacks when people demand sources before they consider adopting his opinions. Everyone has of course the right to block or ignore people they no longer wish to interact with, but
urging other players to block him violates my sense of democracy. The only Troll I can see in this forum at this moment is nfitz and the only person bullied at the moment is Steveintoronto; therefore, I urge the moderators to not tolerate these behaviors and tendencies. I'm the last one to deny tendencies in Steve's own behavior which might be discussed with him in private by the moderators, but they don't justify the hostility he is facing here at the moment.
