VIA Rail

[crs1026]

^That equipment move is the eastward counterpart of the deadhead train that left Toronto back in March. I don’t believe it has actually left Winnipeg, it’s not due back into Toronto for another week.

- Paul

 

[lenaitch]

Policy resolutions in any party tend to be the blended efforts of dozens or hundreds of grassroots party activists, usually redrafted several times to fit within the word limit. The 2014 Liberal resolution for a national transportation strategy, for example, got the word "transit" shoved into it once the Toronto ridings got hold of the draft, and freight along the way too, but the original draft was more focussed on a national passenger rail strategy to reconnect all Canadians. The wording on intercity and regional rail above is along the same lines, and the inclusion of remote and fly-in communities is exactly what we should see, but somehow the word "bus" is not in the draft, although it is the glue that would bring the whole thing together... the recent announcement of $250 million for rural transportation would have been made in October 2015, and the response to the HFR proposal should've been "yes, get on with it, and Calgary-Edmonton while you're at it" or "no, because we're dusting off Ecotrain" if the government paid closer attention to the underlying policy development work that goes into these conventions.

OK, but are they expecting to be taken seriously with a policy resolution that says they will have year-round, bus capable roads to the likes of Nain, Attawapiskat and Rankin Inlet by 2025?

 

[Darwinkgo]

I would predict we are a lot closer to some new rail tunnels than we may think

Yeah, freight is pushing capacity.

 

[Darwinkgo]

Absolutely. So am I.

They sat on their hands for years and did nothing. Now HSR is looking sexy because the Biden administration is pushing it. But they don't have anything on deck but HFR. So they have two choices. Either they go back to the drawing board or sell HFR as HSR lite.

I think the second strategy is the likely outcome. And that is a double edged sword. On one hand, we'll finally see discussion on upgradability. "We can make this better and take it to HSR." On the other hand, we'll see a public feeling duped when the "higher speed rail" the Liberals promised turns out to take over 3 hrs between Toronto-Ottawa and 5 hrs between Toronto-Montreal. It's the kind of political wordsmithing that breeds cynicism.

Sadly, I think there's zero chance they'll be honest with the public and say HFR first and upgrades later as we can afford them.

The party does not equal the government. Think of this as an expression of the party to spend money on rail.

 

[kEiThZ]

The party does not equal the government. Think of this as an expression of the party to spend money on rail.

Sure. I get that.

But politics does mean that politicians respond to their base. And if the base starts arguing that HFR is insufficient, we might be in for a rough ride.

Also, I worry that broad over-the-top ambitions like this, sort of make easy fodder for anti-investment advocates. "Those crazy folks want to run high speed rail to Flin Flon!"

 

[2transpo]

Le TGV Montréal-Québec en voie de dérailler?

Des tractations en haut lieu à Ottawa pourraient compromettre le projet de train rapide entre Montréal et Québec.

www.journaldemontreal.com

However, reliable sources told the Journal that the Minister of Infrastructure, Catherine McKenna, is instead promoting a fully electric high-speed train (TGV) between Montreal and Toronto that would leave aside Quebec and Trois- Rivers.

This means HFR is all but dead. RIP. Is everyone ready for another 5 years of studies?

 

[crs1026]

Le TGV Montréal-Québec en voie de dérailler?

Des tractations en haut lieu à Ottawa pourraient compromettre le projet de train rapide entre Montréal et Québec.

www.journaldemontreal.com

This means HFR is all but dead. RIP. Is everyone ready for another 5 years of studies?

If true, the lack of alignment between Sabia, the Infrastructure bureaucracy, and the Transport bureaucracy, after all this work and angst, is truly concerning. One would have thought the Cabinet was on the cusp of a final decision. Perhaps this is the debate over that decision leaking out, and the convention is just a sideshow.

Having said that, I can't imagine the Liberals arriving at the next election with a TGV like proposal that alienates both the Quebec grass roots and throws even more gobs of money at Ontario with nothing for Alberta. Never mind ignoring the merits of HFR vs HSR vs whatever.

So yeah.... more years of "study" (ie vaccilation) is quite possible.

Ugh.

- Paul

 

[Northern Light]

More details from the article linked above.

(translated to English) (note that TGF here is what we are calling HFR, TGV is HSR)

A Montreal deputy confirmed to the Journal yesterday to be aware of the backstage games in favor of a TGV.
However, he assured that the Quebec caucus of the PLC remained firmly behind a TGF.

In January, the project office set up jointly by VIA and BIC to refine the TGF submitted its analysis to the new Minister of Transport, Omar Alghabra.

According to our information, the document favors an improved version of the TGF over the first version of the project and a TGV. Ottawa has injected $ 71 million into this work.

****

The TGF is "the flagship of our modernization plan," VIA Rail said in an email yesterday.

"The Government of Canada is firm on its commitment to build a high-frequency train between Toronto and Quebec,"
for her part assured Chantalle Aubertin, spokesperson for Minister McKenna.

 

[roger1818]

Le TGV Montréal-Québec en voie de dérailler?

Des tractations en haut lieu à Ottawa pourraient compromettre le projet de train rapide entre Montréal et Québec.

www.journaldemontreal.com

This means HFR is all but dead. RIP. Is everyone ready for another 5 years of studies?

If true, that 5 more years of studies will be followed by studies by Air Canada on how HSR will not be economical and will damage their viability. Similar to the way Brightline will be required to compensate the state for lost toll road revenue when they extend their line to Tampa, VIA would likely be responsible to compensate the airlines for lost passenger revenue.

 

[Allandale25]

Le TGV Montréal-Québec en voie de dérailler?

Des tractations en haut lieu à Ottawa pourraient compromettre le projet de train rapide entre Montréal et Québec.

www.journaldemontreal.com

This means HFR is all but dead. RIP. Is everyone ready for another 5 years of studies?

This appears to be the news on the HFR proposal that VIA submitted at the end of December:

"In January, the project office set up jointly by VIA and BIC to refine the TGF [HFR] submitted its analysis to the new Minister of Transport, Omar Alghabra." (emphasis added)

So no, I don't think the article means HFR is dead yet. We'd need to see something more concrete.

 

[kEiThZ]

Le TGV Montréal-Québec en voie de dérailler?

Des tractations en haut lieu à Ottawa pourraient compromettre le projet de train rapide entre Montréal et Québec.

www.journaldemontreal.com

This means HFR is all but dead. RIP. Is everyone ready for another 5 years of studies?

This is actually quite reassuring to me. This means they are all motivated to build something. And they are actually discussing rail infrastructure behind the scenes.

The HSR boosters will eventually lose to political and economic reality. I'm now cautiously optimistic about the budget.

Aside from the whole matter of pissing off an entire province the Liberals need, with an HSR proposal, cancelling HFR now would crush the credibility of the CIB. They at least have some plausible deniability on political independence right now. If the government trashes tens of millions of dollars of engineering work and analysis and orders them to build whatever, that will be the end of the institution.

Also, this quote from the article is really interesting:

In January, the project office set up jointly by VIA and BIC to refine the TGF submitted its analysis to the new Minister of Transport, Omar Alghabra.

According to our information, the document favors an improved version of the TGF over the first version of the project and a TGV. Ottawa has injected $ 71 million into this work.

This is exactly what I've been advocating for. There's scope for upgraded HFR that is true High Performance/Higher Speed Rail.

 

[MisterF]

"the document favors an improved version of the TGF over the first version of the project and a TGV" caught my eye too. Maybe they determined that for a bit more money they can rebuild certain sections of the line to higher speed standard while keeping the more challenging sections slower. Could it be that this has taken so long because they saw an opportunity to take the original HFR concept and improve on it?

Le TGV Montréal-Québec en voie de dérailler?

Des tractations en haut lieu à Ottawa pourraient compromettre le projet de train rapide entre Montréal et Québec.

www.journaldemontreal.com

This means HFR is all but dead. RIP. Is everyone ready for another 5 years of studies?

Is it just me or do your posts consist mostly of proclaiming the death of HFR?

 

[Allandale25]

"the document favors an improved version of the TGF over the first version of the project and a TGV" caught my eye too. Maybe they determined that for a bit more money they can rebuild certain sections of the line to higher speed standard while keeping the more challenging sections slower. Could it be that this has taken so long because they saw an opportunity to take the original HFR concept and improve on it?

That's what I'm thinking as well. The article really doesn't detail the corridor aspects of HFR vs HSR between Toronto-Montreal. For HSR if we assume the CN lakeshore route is used, sure the government can say they'll spend a lot of money but there could be significant opposition between Scarboro and Durham Junctions by local residents to add HSR tracks. Unless the HSR proponents want to see co-running with GO and HSR at slower speeds? Or tunnel the entire stretch? There are other pinch points along the CN lakeshore route as well. Also, as has been discussed many, many times here and which HSR Canada never acknowledges, dealing with CN in general for the entire HSR Toronto-Montreal Corridor (and close to Toronto, Metrolinx).

 

[nfitz]

Could it be that this has taken so long because they saw an opportunity to take the original HFR concept and improve on it?

Perhaps it's taken so long because there was so much to improve on!

In general, there's nothing wrong with the concept of having HFR (and west of Toronto too). It's all about how you do it. If they could improve on what they originally proposed, then I'd happily jump up and down supporting it!

For HSR if we assume the CN lakeshore route is used, sure the government can say they'll spend a lot of money but there could be significant opposition between Scarboro and Durham Junctions by local residents to add HSR tracks ...

This could explain the real reason that Metrolinx is moving the Ontario subway line so that it's all to the north of the existing tracks, leaving space on the south for future HSR tracks - and leaving it up to the feds to expropriate community centres ... might explain a lot. Though I'm quickly heading into conspiracy theory nuttery here.

Someone should FOIA the VIA and Transport Canada submissions to Metrolinx for the Ontario Line.

 

[SFO-YYZ]

Le TGV Montréal-Québec en voie de dérailler?

Des tractations en haut lieu à Ottawa pourraient compromettre le projet de train rapide entre Montréal et Québec.

www.journaldemontreal.com

This means HFR is all but dead. RIP. Is everyone ready for another 5 years of studies?

Read the article, but I honestly did not see any firm indication anywhere in the article that "HFR is dead". Stop sensationalizing the issue and making blanket statements that are nothing more than your personal opinions.