News   Apr 23, 2024
 166     0 
News   Apr 23, 2024
 386     0 
News   Apr 22, 2024
 1.2K     0 

VIA Rail

Apparently both now resolved:

That's for Akwesasne near Cornwall. That settlement didn't address the situation at Tyendinaga, which is near Belleville.

Yes, they've been working on it for sometime. I hadn't realised they still weren't finished. I bet if Belleville had a boil water advisory for nearly 20 years, the government would have acted about 19 years ago!

That still doesn't address 'in sympathy' blockades, which the 2020 CN blockade was about. Having redundant ROWs might help, but they wouldn't solve the problem, any more than for a major derailment or washout. Rail corridors are inherently limited in number.
There have been other blockades there over the years. Yes, it was in sympathy but I have a hard time being upset about it, when the province has no title the land the 401 is on, and neither CP nor CN have title to the land the railway is on. I don't see either the railways (or VIA Rail) reaching out to at least offer payment for their tracks!

Reminder that these first nations sold their land to the British. Now if the white man blockaded important railway lines, they would be charged and prosecuted, but it's okay for first nations to blockaded, talk about double standards.
While many First Nations did sell land (though the courts have ruled many of these "sales" had huge issues - there was never a sale of the tract in question at Tyendinaga. The governments all admit it, the court has ruled on it - and yet the situation remains unresolved.

I thought that the media had reported extensively on Treaty 3 1/2 and the Culbertson Tract land claim over the decades - and it was reported very extensively last year.

No drinking water? maybe if the chief's of the first nations didn't pocket all the tax payers money, they would have drinking water.
What tax payers money? Given how badly the First Nations have been treated for centuries, I'm surprised that anyone would be blaming them. Particularly when they chose not to blockade either the CP line or the 401! Wasn't there even an offer that VIA didn't take them up on, to let passenger trains pass?
 
Last edited:
So. Any ideas on possible ways forward if the CPC is elected. Does HFR get canned? Does the scope get reduced?

"A Conservative government will deliver on transit for fast-growing communities like Kanata," said O’Toole. "Through Canada’s Recovery Plan, the Kanata LRT project and the VIA Rail high frequency rail project will create thousands of jobs and fuel a strong recovery for the Ottawa area."

 
"A Conservative government will deliver on transit for fast-growing communities like Kanata," said O’Toole. "Through Canada’s Recovery Plan, the Kanata LRT project and the VIA Rail high frequency rail project will create thousands of jobs and fuel a strong recovery for the Ottawa area."


The most encouraging part of that quote was the acknowledgement of the need to end delays.

Not saying that the CPC side didn’t create its own share of those delays in the past, but just like Ford in Toronto, the political mileage from being able to say the other party’s delays have been addressed and things are getting done is as much an incentive as taking credit for the work itself.

- Paul
 
^ I would look to the quote in the CPC platform page 27 that speaks to cancelling the CIB and deploying the unspent money to valid infrastructure projects, and “continue already committed projects”. (It would be naive to expect them to refer to HFR by name, as it’s a Liberal branded project…. but just as GO RER became GO Expansion, a rose by any other….).

The parts of VIA’s BCS that have favourable ROI would be the best to hope for. The London-Windsor portion might actually play to a Ford-O’Toole “kiss and make up“ once the election is over.…. a CPC federal-provincial united team thing just in time for Ford’s next election.

- Paul
Its funny, spending CIB money as grants increases the deficit. Oops.
 
The hand is faster than the eye. The money was already borrowed by Ottawa and deposited in the CIB. This simply deploys it, instead of waiting on some magic event…..no change in federal debt.

- Paul
Except not. CIB has assets. Grants do not generate assets. Deficits are measured on change of assets.
 
Except not. CIB has assets. Grants do not generate assets. Deficits are measured on change of assets.

I'm clearly not an accountant or finance type.... but...... if we are taking CIB money (previously raised by borrowing, hence already being carried by Ottawa as debt) and investing it as a VIA project.... would that not translate to the investment turning up on VIA's balance sheet (and hence Ottawa's) as an asset?

I take your point that disbursing CIB money as an operating grant to somebody out there is not an investment as a loan from CIB would be... but CIB money spent on HFR is meant to be an investment with intent to generate a return, not a grant.

To my simple brain, the problem with CIB's lack of progress is that they have money in their hands that was borrowed, and hence is attracting a borrowing cost, ie expense, but with no immediate prospect for a return on the money.... because the supposed infrastructure projects that will generate the return aren't getting built. That has to be a costly proposition for Ottawa - money borrowed but not put to use.

What's not clear in the CPC platform is how any net income generated from HFR flows back to service the debt, once the debt moves from a CIB account to general federal accounts. VIa has never previously paid a dividend to its owner, but maybe if HFR were built it might be in a position to do so. Or apply it to reduce the subsidy Ottawa pays VIA for other services, eg remote and transcon.

- Paul
 
Last edited:
I'm clearly not an accountant or finance type.... but...... if we are taking CIB money (previously raised by borrowing, hence already being carried by Ottawa as debt) and investing it as a VIA project.... would that not translate to the investment turning up on VIA's balance sheet (and hence Ottawa's) as an asset?

I take your point that an operating grant to somebody out there is not an investment as a loan from CIB would be... but CIB money spent on HFR is meant to be an investment with intent to generate a return, not a grant.

To my simple brain, the problem with CIB's lack of progress is that they have money in their hands that was borrowed, and hence is attracting a borrowing cost, ie expense, but with no immediate prospect for a return on the money.... because the supposed infrastructure projects that will generate the return aren't getting built. That has to be a costly proposition for Ottawa - money borrowed but not put to use.

What's not clear in the CPC platform is how any net income generated from HFR flows back to service the debt, once the debt moves from a CIB account to general federal accounts.

- Paul
It isn't like they have a $30 billion bank account. They have rights to draw $30 billion. Which creates a -$30 billion on the Government Books, and a +$30 billion on the CIB books, even if no money is borrowed, and no money flowed.

For assets owned by VIA Rail, if it is $6 billion lets say, it would be -$6 billion on government book, +$6 billion on the CIB book, -$6 billion on the CIB book, +a depreciated $6 billion on VIA's books. Which yeah, would be the same as a grant to VIA.

But for every thing else CIB does? it would be turning a wash into a negative.
 
It seems there won't be any service between Toronto and Montreal for a while:

 
It seems there won't be any service between Toronto and Montreal for a while:


I gather that at least train #62 today was diverted via Ottawa.
 
It seems there won't be any service between Toronto and Montreal for a while:


A couple of images from the above link:

1630617398543.png

Taken from: https://www.ctvnews.ca/polopoly_fs/...e.png_gen/derivatives/landscape_960/image.png

1630617474860.png

Taken from video here: https://ottawa.ctvnews.ca/video?clipId=2271283
 
Because no system made by humans is infallible.

While that is certainly true; I'd venture to say we can make systems that are a great deal less fallible than the one's we have (see PTC for a start); and we really ought to get around to using them.

This is true in many more fields than railways.

If we ran the world in accordance with existing best practices/technology, we could drastically cut disease, medical errors, traffic accidents, railway accidents, pollution, poverty, do all of that and more, for, in most cases the same or less in operating dollars once the changes are fully delivered (its the one-time cost of change that is the most common impediment)
 
Last edited:

Back
Top