VIA Rail

[crs1026]

The Federal Government is delivering a budget later this month - March 22. That will tell us enough.

- Paul

 

[steveintoronto]

The Federal Government is delivering a budget later this month - March 22. That will tell us enough.

- Paul

The timing of that poll seems exquisite v. the impending budget. It may not be coincidental. Hopefully it's emboldened the FedLibs to 'do what's necessary' to see this nation on a healthy, sustainable course. And a huge part of doing that is knowing the majority nation backs it.

Fingers crossed...

Here's the poll at Nanos:
http://www.nanosresearch.com/sites/default/files/POLNAT-S15-T730.pdf

 

[TOareaFan]

They needed a poll to know that a nation of borrowers (that is what we have become) supports their government borrowing more and more?

 

[steveintoronto]

They needed a poll to know that a nation of borrowers (that is what we have become) supports their government borrowing more and more?

Do you own your car? Your house? Did you pay cash for your education? Your children's?

"Debt" and "deficit" can mean very different things, not only from each other, but other forms of borrowing. Most investments are borrowing. Are you against investing in the future? So if you don't, who does?

Your furnace is wasting massive amounts of heat and is very inefficient. You can pay on time to have it replaced, and even with interest on installments, it pays for itself in two years. I'd say that's a very reasonable investment.

And most of all, are you aware of the difference between *secured* and unsecured debt?

 

[TOareaFan]

Do you own your car? Your house? Did you pay cash for your education? Your children's?

Not sure why a general statement (backed up by stats, btw) that Canada is far more a nation of borrowers now than it ever has been...evokes such a personal response (some might say attack)....yes I own my cars....saved and paid cash for all 3 that we currently own.....yes I own my own house....bought it with savings and a small LVR mortgage which is gone....yes I paid cash for my education and ~30 years later paid for my daughter's too (happen to think the best gift a parent can give their kid {if their able} is paying for their school...not trips or cars.

but this is not about me...I get that in the world of debt management I am an anomoly.....all I said was that Canada has become a nation of people that borrow freely and comfortably...so it should be no surprise that when asked in a poll they are comfortable with their government borrowing.

"Debt" and "deficit" can mean very different things, not only from each other, but other forms of borrowing. Most investments are borrowing. Are you against investing in the future? So if you don't, who does?

Debt and deficit ARE different things (only Kevin O'leary thinks otherwise ). No I am not against investing the future....why you got that, again, from my simple observation that a poll was not necessary to determine Canadians' comfort level with deficits (which in this case have to be borrowed because well we already have debt).

Your furnace is wasting massive amounts of heat and is very inefficient. You can pay on time to have it replaced, and even with interest on installments, it pays for itself in two years. I'd say that's a very reasonable investment.

another personal statement......but, personally, I would pay cash for the new furnace...either from my savings or from ongoing cashflow (and if I needed to, cut back in other areas).

And most of all, are you aware of the difference between *secured* and unsecured debt?

Been a lender for over 30 years so, yes I hope I am aware of the difference. BTW, almost all (perhaps all) federal government debt is unsecured...just float some bonds.

Again, though, you seem to have drawn a lot of conclusions about my thoughts on debt from statement that was just an observation that the poll was probably not necessary....but, yes, it is a little disappointing that we have learned nothing from the very positive lessons on debt that Mr. Martin taught us, in times of economic growth (and, yes our economy is growing) you run surpluses and pay down debt....so that when the next economic downturn comes you are in a good position to run deficits to support the economy until it grows again......Mr. Harper did a great job of keeping our economy ticking over during the great global recession....but his ability to do so was underpinned by the great work of fiscal prudence that Mr Martin did.

 

[steveintoronto]

And your reason against borrowing to save, TO? And for the record:

Foreign investors bought $10.23-billion worth of Canadian securities in December, sealing a new annual record for purchases of bonds, stocks and money market paper, Statistics Canada said on Friday.

Net securities’ investment from outside Canada in 2016 totaled $161.28-billion. The previous yearly high was the $127.69-billion seen in 2010.

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/repo...-canadian-securities-in-2016/article34065660/

They obviously feel Canada is very secure. And they'll feel even more so if the investments show gain, both for them and the nation. In the event, the Infrastructure Bank and the form of investment in terms of government investment v. private, and especially as how that relates to projects like HFR is yet to be finalized, but projection is for it to be on a ratio of 1:5....gov. investment being multiplied five times. That has pros and cons, the obvious pro being beneficial infrastructure being built now to affect a savings now. For some reason, most likely other nation's (like the UK) making an abysmal mess of PPP and PFI, that hasn't worked out. Canada's experience has been far better.

Can anyone suggest a more pragmatic plan at this juncture in time for Canada's abject lack of investment in infrastructure?

What would some suggest? Raising taxes...? God forbid those who speak the name of Harper and Martin in the same sentence...

I ask again: (and very few persons in *any* nation pay cash for the following, except perhaps money launderers and tax cheats)

Do you own your car? Your house? Did you pay cash for your education? Your children's?

 

[TOareaFan]

And your reason against borrowing to save, TO? And for the record:

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/repo...-canadian-securities-in-2016/article34065660/

They obviously feel Canada is very secure. And they'll feel even more so if the investments show gain, both for them and the nation. In the event, the Infrastructure Bank and the form of investment in terms of government investment v. private, and especially as how that relates to projects like HFR is yet to be finalized, but projection is for it to be on a ratio of 1:5....gov. investment being multiplied five times. That has pros and cons, the obvious pro being beneficial infrastructure being built now to affect a savings now. For some reason, most likely other nation's (like the UK) making an abysmal mess of PPP and PFI, that hasn't worked out. Canada's experience has been far better.

Where did I say that lending to Canada is not very secure? It is.....but that does not mean we should just keep borrowing either....two separate issues.

But we have taken this off on an awful tangent....all because you took offense to the simple observation I made about the poll. I regret making it (not because it was wrong though...because it wasn't)

 

[steveintoronto]

Where did I say that lending to Canada is not very secure? It is.....but that does not mean we should just keep borrowing either....two separate issues.

But we have taken this off on an awful tangent....all because you took offense to the simple observation I made about the poll. I regret making it (not because it was wrong though...because it wasn't)

I didn't take "offense"...I don't have any debt! None!

But you made a brash statement on how VIA is to be financed, without even knowing what the upcoming budget will state. A reminder of at least how the HFR project is touted to be financed:

VIA Rail looks to private investment for $3-billion dedicated track plan
Eric Atkins

The Globe and Mail
Published Thursday, Jun. 04, 2015 6:38PM EDT
Last updated Thursday, Jun. 04, 2015 8:03PM EDT

The head of Via Rail Canada Inc. brought his pitch for private investment to Toronto on Thursday, promoting a chance to reshape the money-losing passenger-train service.

Yves Desjardins-Siciliano told a room full of bankers, pension-fund managers and developers the $3-billion proposal to buy and build dedicated passenger train tracks in the busy Toronto-Ottawa-Montreal corridor could bring double-digit returns to a consortium of investors in the Crown corporation.

“We are striving to make Via Rail more relevant to Canadians … while not over overburdening Canada’s taxpayers,” Mr. Desjardins-Siciliano said. “A corollary to that may be a way for the private sector to put its shoulder to the wheel.”

Most of Via Rail’s trains travel on rails owned by freight carrier Canadian National Railway Co., leading to congestion and delays that drive away customers. Mr. Desjardins-Siciliano said passenger trains that travel at 110 miles an hour are incompatible with much slower cargo trains. He pointed to Via Rail’s on-time performance of 63 per cent in the first quarter, compared with 71 per cent a year earlier. In the first three months of 2015, Via Rail’s operating loss was $86-million.

Dedicated tracks and more frequent service in the key Toronto-Ottawa-Montreal corridor would help the company boost ridership and revenues while capitalizing on a demographic shift that is fostering an interest in train travel, he said. Younger people care little about car ownership, one-quarter of Canada’s population will be more than 65 years of age by 2040 and many immigrants come from countries where trains are dominant modes of travel, he said. [...]

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/repo...billion-dedicated-track-plan/article24814969/

With government 'seed' money, we'll have a much better idea of how this could transpire, and the upcoming budget ostensibly will detail that. As I stated prior: "fingers crossed".

I'd say the proclivity for persons polled to favour such schemes goes well beyond what you give them credit for, TO.

Did you pay cash for your house? It's a very simple question...

Edit to Clarify: "I don't have any debt! None!" In fact, I just remembered, I have my credit card balance to pay down end of the month. It's automatically deducted from my current account. They pay me a percentage, not the other way around.

 

[TOareaFan]

But you made a brash statement on how VIA is to be financed, without even knowing what the upcoming budget will state. A reminder of at least how the

Show me that? I made a statement that we should not have needed a poll to know that Canadians are comfortable with the government taking on debt....that's all....show me were I commented on how VIA is to be financed? I am open to discussion...but not if you insist on putting words in my mouth.

 

[kEiThZ]

@TOareaFan

Ignore the troll. I do. He adds very little except for claiming to be an authority on Guelph and some occasional Google-Fu, largely focused on the UK lately....

You're 100% right. Canada is a nation of borrowers. And you are an anomaly. The current path is not sustainable. Despite the low interest rates. That's why I think we're now seeing the plan of attack. Offload borrowing to the private sector. And this is not a bad idea. The private sector is looking for better returns. And VIA rail needs capital. Tickets will not be as cheap as they could have been with purely government investment. But it'll actually get built.

I am actually all for more private and more privatized infrastructure. Yes, the tolls are annoying. And no it's not fair on lower income members of our society. But given that Canadians aren't willing to pay the taxes required to fund all the government services and works they want, the only way I see anything getting built is substantially more private capital. And as long as interest rates are low, might as well take advantage.

And honestly, it's a better idea to let the private sector do it. Instead of the bait and switch we might get from politicians. I voted for Trudeau because I wanted infrastructure investment. Only ~11% went to transport. That's pretty disappointing, since transport probably has the greatest productivity payoff given the size of this country and its distributed pockets of urban density. I'm hoping the private sector can do better.

 

[steveintoronto]

I am actually all for more private and more privatized infrastructure.

Which is exactly what I detailed. Speaking of "trolls", you can't read.

Morneau's budget is *tightened* over the last one. He's being careful of spending. It seems some can't follow the news on this, but one aspect he is focusing on is following through with his pledges of the last budget, and ostensibly that includes seed money for HFR.

They needed a poll to know that a nation of borrowers (that is what we have become) supports their government borrowing more and more?

Here's a link on what's known about Morneau's upcoming budget:

Bill Morneau planning cautious budget for March 22
http://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/morneau-budget-trump-march-1.4013632

[...] it will focus heavily on providing specifics on the billions in spending announced in the Trudeau government's first budget last year, rather than rolling out a large suite of new programs.[...]

Lots more on-line.

Show me that? I made a statement that we should not have needed a poll to know that Canadians are comfortable with the government taking on debt....that's all....show me were I commented on how VIA is to be financed? I am open to discussion...but not if you insist on putting words in my mouth.

Because of what came before your comment. The string was about Morneau potentially making an announcement on VIA financing. I would presume that you could have followed the lineage, but alas.

Morneau has indicated in previous announcements that he will have news "shortly" on VIA, and the inference was in the imminent budget. Whether you want to then extrapolate that into (gist) "Canadians already overloaded with debt" is your wont, but it isn't borne out by the unfolding sequence of events.

 

[TOareaFan]

Am now taking the advice of @kEiThZ

 

[steveintoronto]

Am now taking the advice of @kEiThZ

Thank you. I'll be quoting Morneau, so we'll all be further ahead.

Meantime, here's from a Post Media paper railing against VIA, and completely missing the point, starting with Union Station (when was this lady last here?) and being completely unaware that VIA only leases space there now. The author is wrong on almost every point. This is the kind of news we're going to have to brace for in the next coming while as VIA does get fresh attention and investment:

Yedlin: Via Rail operations remain stuck in the past
For many, the prospect of train travel conjures up a relaxed, civilized experience.
Published on: February 9, 2017

But those images are challenged when it comes to travelling aboard Canada’s national rail carrier from Toronto’s antiquated Union Station, as I recently experienced.

Long in need of an update, the station is reminiscent of a bunker, lacking natural light or modes of passage to accommodate those less nimble or able bodied; the presence of elevators to get passengers from the boarding line to the tracks not immediately obvious.

Then there is the boarding experience.

In recent times, Via Rail has decided it needs to weigh bags coming on board. Anything over 40 pounds in a single is subject to an extra charge — for safety purposes, they say. But that doesn’t make sense.

Unlike aircraft that require careful weight and balance calculations, the same logic doesn’t hold true for train travel.

Hands up if you’ve seen the mammoth pieces of luggage loaded onto trains in Europe being weighed to make sure they are safe. The only possible explanation is that there are restrictions on how much weight Via Rail employees are contractually permitted to lift.

If that’s the case, it’s about worker safety – fair – not passenger safety.

What’s to stop a passenger from figuring out how to redistribute the extra weight among a carry-on or two, and then stuff everything back into the offending bag when they board the train?

Nothing.

To illustrate Via’s dated approach – and how they could easily capture that extra $20 – is this example: Suppose the bag is determined to be overweight and the passenger is willing to pay an additional $20. Do Via employees handling bags have a wireless, point-of-sale terminal to process the transaction?

No.

Passengers must go to another counter to pay, heavy bag in tow. Not exactly efficient. Airlines have point-of-sale terminals functioning at 35,000 feet, but not Via.

This approach continues on the train.

Want to buy something on board? The options are cash or credit, with a manual machine used to process the transaction. For those of a certain age, it’s reminiscent of those Chargex commercials of the early 1970s.

When it comes to cash, who needs the headache, much less the risk of the float disappearing or the administrative costs?There’s a reason airlines have dispensed with using cash on board.

A modern exception is Via’s app, which, according to one millenial, is actually quite good. However, that same millenial wondered why he couldn’t use it to pay for something on board.

Via Rail employees are also frustrated with the outdated operating methods in place. A purser I spoke with about my recent experiences said staff are also discouraged that the company is so behind when it comes to having automated processes and procedures.

Rail is – and should be – a viable travel option for Canadians.

It is less stressful than flying and it’s a great way to get cars off congested roads and decrease the carbon footprint. VIA touts that very statistic on its website.

It’s one reasons it should be considered as one of the areas where road infrastructure dollars should be spent in Alberta – connecting Calgary and Edmonton to create an economic powerhouse, but also decrease the risks of travelling on the Queen Elizabeth II Highway.

It also has to be reliable and a pleasant experience.

Via is missing the importance of a brand and what it means to develop, market and nurture that brand. It’s not enough to be the only regularly scheduled option for rail travel in the country. The caveat here is that you can’t get on a regularly scheduled train out of Calgary – just Edmonton — but that’s a column for another day.

It also seems to have missed the memo that an automation revolution is underway. The Internet of Things is changing how business is done. It’s all about looking for efficiencies to boost bottom line profitability by using technology, either to better service customers or gather data to make them more efficient.

Hunter Harrison, the former chief executive of CP Rail, is about to apply his approach to profitability and efficiency at CSX or another railroad. He should take a whistle stop at VIA and offer some pointers on what they need to do to increase customer service, efficiency and ultimately, ridership.

VIA Rail should be part of Canada’s transportation infrastructure and network – but it’s in need of a re-boot.

Much like Air Canada and CN Rail, which were once Crown corporations and now are successful, publicly traded entities, it’s time to privatize VIA and take it out of the Dark Ages.

Deborah Yedlin is a Calgary Herald columnist

dyedlin@postmedia.com

http://calgaryherald.com/business/energy/yedlin-via-rail-operations-still-stuck-in-the-past

 

[crs1026]

I am doubtful that VIA will attract any big handouts in this budget. But the HFR/public-private idea has been under study long enough. If the government declares that the study is still in process, that's code for it isn't going anywhere. We can take the hint. The budget will have to say something about the infrastructure bank idea - again, if the Liberals are committed to this, they will want to announce some prime candidate projects. If HFR isn't on that list, again, we can take the hint.

I am hopeful that the equipment purchase will still be on the agenda. It benefits two provinces, is likely to be aimed at the issues that Ottawa has with Bombardier - certainly a more palatable option than outright subsidy - and is likely cost-beneficial considering that the existing equipment is at end of life.

As to the Calgary article, the author's complaints are quite valid, it's the context that is meanspirited. Airlines have big customer interface systems because they can spread the cost over millions of customers. Airports are configured for these systems. Airlines don't have federal bureaucrats throwing things in the spokes, or pretending they don't notice VIA's inability to improve itself.

VIA's customer base is much smaller, their budget is nitpicked by Treasury Board, and nobody ever fitted out Union Station for the latest wifi stuff. VIA's onboard ticket accounting is actually fairly modern, but it doesn't have bells and whistles like OBS charging or baggage. And yes, VIA's baggage policy is hugely muddled, and worthy of crtiticism. For the mandarins in Ottawa, stories like this aren't incorrect - it's more like they represent "mission accomplished".

If we don't hear any mention of HFR in the budget, then it means that "death by a thousand paper cuts" is still government policy, regardless of how upbeat VIA's CEO may sound.

- Paul

 

[kEiThZ]

I am doubtful that VIA will attract any big handouts in this budget. But the HFR/public-private idea has been under study long enough. If the government declares that the study is still in process, that's code for it isn't going anywhere. We can take the hint. The budget will have to say something about the infrastructure bank idea - again, if the Liberals are committed to this, they will want to announce some prime candidate projects. If HFR isn't on that list, again, we can take the hint.

I am hopeful that the equipment purchase will still be on the agenda. It benefits two provinces, is likely to be aimed at the issues that Ottawa has with Bombardier - certainly a more palatable option than outright subsidy - and is likely cost-beneficial considering that the existing equipment is at end of life.

The way I see it, this is only happening with the new Infrastructure Bank and private investment. They need a mega project with high vis to launch the bank. They will not launch without it. Even capital stock replenishment won't happen without the project. At least not in this budget.