VIA Rail

[kEiThZ]

Dealing with Metrolinx at Union Station? A bypass around Sharbot Lake? The Scarboro Junction situation? Old bridges in Peterborough? Could be several aspects.

What have they been doing for the last two years?? What was in the JPO submission that was supposedly turned in?

And the very fact that have half a billion penciled in over the next 5 years, says they may not actually do anything for the next half decade. Once again they are prioritizing anything and everything over Infrastructure. They just lost my vote.

 

[Allandale25]

^ Looks like $12 million will be spent between April 1, 2021 and March 30, 2022 (I believe that's the fiscal year). One would hope some pages of the JPO's work could be provided

 

[crs1026]

I really don't get this. What de-risking is left?

Perhaps Ottawa is directly funding some bits that the CIB felt impaired the business case? Which gives the CIB assurance to make its own investment decision?

Nevertheless the use of the word "explore" and reference to "next steps" says to me, this is not a "go". As does the pretty meagre cash flows by year.

I'm feeling the same as when I watch the Leafs lose in overtime. I actually waited up for this?

- Paul

 

[UrbanJon]

Further update. Two more references to HFR:

View attachment 313733

Not sure why this says "396 million" and the text above says "491.2 million".

View attachment 313734

I interpret from this that HFR won't start construction until 2026. In the very best case scenario, it means that HFR won't be finished until 2026, which isn't great either.

Basically, that means HFR is dead. Political instability is going to kill it in that time frame, especially if it keeps dragging its feet.

RIP VIA. HFR was VIA's last hope.

 

[crs1026]

^The discrepancy between $396M and 491M is likely the lack of a sixth year in the chart. Text says it's a six year program but charts only run five years out.

- Paul

 

[p_xavier]

Funding is supposed to come from the CIB, I'm even surprised there's HFR referenced in the budget.

 

[Allandale25]

^ Good point

 

[DirectionNorth]

I'm honestly confused. What parts of HFR can VIA do for $500 million? It can't build any substantial trackage, but it's too much for studies. If funding comes from the CIB, is this just a partial grant?

 

[p_xavier]

I'm honestly confused. What parts of HFR can VIA do for $500 million? It can't build any substantial trackage, but it's too much for studies. If funding comes from the CIB, is this just a partial grant?

Derisking, or funding the contingency for the CIB I assume.

 

[nfitz]

I'm honestly confused. What parts of HFR can VIA do for $500 million? It can't build any substantial trackage, but it's too much for studies. If funding comes from the CIB, is this just a partial grant?

None. The budget explicitly notes that a final investment decision on HFR is still to come.

Presumably this infrastructure investment is exclusively for infrastructure that exists outside of the HFR corridor from Peterborough to Smith Falls - and probably from Toronto to Peterborough and on the Quebec north shore.

As such, connecting services west of Toronto I'd think would benefit from this - along with the existing Toronto to Quebec sections which will still carry service after HFR (which as far as I know, is all of it).

 

[crs1026]

^If they are just holding HFR for a future separate announcement, that's odd. I would have thought they would want this on the table as a "getting Canada back to work" item. Maybe HFR is just too regional without something comparable to offer Alberta or the Maritimes.

I can see some money spent between Montreal and Ottawa, maybe as a "HFR Light" demonstration project. That's a safe investment regardless of the future scenario, be it HSR or absolutely no change from today's system.

- Paul

 

[Darwinkgo]

Perhaps Ottawa is directly funding some bits that the CIB felt impaired the business case? Which gives the CIB assurance to make its own investment decision?

Nevertheless the use of the word "explore" and reference to "next steps" says to me, this is not a "go". As does the pretty meagre cash flows by year.

I'm feeling the same as when I watch the Leafs lose in overtime. I actually waited up for this?

- Paul

You're thinking too specifically - it isn't that there are bits that impair the business case, it is that the capital cost came in higher than revenues would support.

This is the 'non-approval' approval. Full steam ahead!

I interpret from this that HFR won't start construction until 2026. In the very best case scenario, it means that HFR won't be finished until 2026, which isn't great either.

Basically, that means HFR is dead. Political instability is going to kill it in that time frame, especially if it keeps dragging its feet.

RIP VIA. HFR was VIA's last hope.

This is wrong. Remember, the CIB investment does not need to be in the budget because it is not a new allocation from the Treasury. This is the indication that construction starts next year, when capital subsidy goes up to $68 million.

Derisking, or funding the contingency for the CIB I assume.

Yes. That is exactly what it is. The way I interpret the numbers, is $12 million to get the project to a go/no go decision from cabinet on the environmental/duty to consult approval, plus any beginning of construction before April 1, 2022.

None. The budget explicitly notes that a final investment decision on HFR is still to come.

Presumably this infrastructure investment is exclusively for infrastructure that exists outside of the HFR corridor from Peterborough to Smith Falls - and probably from Toronto to Peterborough and on the Quebec north shore.

As such, connecting services west of Toronto I'd think would benefit from this - along with the existing Toronto to Quebec sections which will still carry service after HFR (which as far as I know, is all of it).

Not exactly. This could be the estimated needed federal subsidy if HFR is approved.

^If they are just holding HFR for a future separate announcement, that's odd. I would have thought they would want this on the table as a "getting Canada back to work" item. Maybe HFR is just too regional without something comparable to offer Alberta or the Maritimes.

I can see some money spent between Montreal and Ottawa, maybe as a "HFR Light" demonstration project. That's a safe investment regardless of the future scenario, be it HSR or absolutely no change from today's system.

- Paul

So, you might think it is odd, but because the feds are the regulator for environmental approval purposes, and the crown for Indigenous consultations purposes, until they are entirely sure, they have to be coy.

I interpret the allocation as the capital subsidy - investments over and above what HFR can pay back.

 

[kEiThZ]

Funding is supposed to come from the CIB, I'm even surprised there's HFR referenced in the budget.

They can put in whatever announcement they want in the budget. Even if it's from a crown agency like the CIB.

 

[Darwinkgo]

They can put in whatever announcement they want in the budget. Even if it's from a crown agency like the CIB.

But they don't want HFR lost. It will be the vindication of the CIB. They also don't want to announce it on a day when the cities got very little because construction is over heated in the economy right now. Would provide a bad contrast. Plus needing to explain the net cost basis, etc.

 

[kEiThZ]

You're thinking too specifically - it isn't that there are bits that impair the business case, it is that the capital cost came in higher than revenues would support.

This is the 'non-approval' approval. Full steam ahead!

This is wrong. Remember, the CIB investment does not need to be in the budget because it is not a new allocation from the Treasury. This is the indication that construction starts next year, when capital subsidy goes up to $68 million.



Yes. That is exactly what it is. The way I interpret the numbers, is $12 million to get the project to a go/no go decision from cabinet on the environmental/duty to consult approval, plus any beginning of construction before April 1, 2022.

Not exactly. This could be the estimated needed federal subsidy if HFR is approved.


So, you might think it is odd, but because the feds are the regulator for environmental approval purposes, and the crown for Indigenous consultations purposes, until they are entirely sure, they have to be coy.

I interpret the allocation as the capital subsidy - investments over and above what HFR can pay back.

That's quite the generous interpretation. Until we see more, the pattern with the Liberals on this file isn't exactly reassuring.