^So long as rail passsenger runs at a loss, there will be a decision required about whether to offer a subsidy. This pushes the decision into a political forum and political decisions do not correlate precisely with ROI (or even some more abstract metric of overall benefit). It would be nice if there were formal criteria but no one should assume that a political process will slavishly apply these. There will be winners and losers.
I see a big difference in how the business case will evolve for lines radiating from a major urban hub that lies in the country's most densely populated area, irrespective of the population size of the end point.. Northern Ontario is a good example of that... when you have the prospect of attracting x riders a day to/from Niagara, plus y riders a day to/from Windsor, Kitchener, Belleville, etc it gives you the prospect of filling an entire train a day, even if the northern end point (let's take Kap as an example) may be small and the train is empty when it gets there.
Tourism creates ridership in a different manner than A to B transport . But even there, VIA might be better served to negotiate with tour operators that use the Ocean to get people to Matapedia, and then load them on a bus so they can have a structured, planned, far reaching tour of the region. The town of Gaspe isn't that big or full of attractions that one can build a major market hauling people there, unless they have the mobility to explore the broader area, and stop along the way. I have no insight into whether a one-seat ride to Gaspe by train would generate more tour business than a package tour operation from Matapedia, but the decision will be based on market and cost. Connecting Gaspe (or any other destination) just to have the line on a map is bad decisionmaking.
At the end of the day, a line with one train a day will seldom generate enough revenue to create appetite for investment, public or private. Realistically, most rail passenger in this country will be in corridors where there are enough riders to fill multiple trains a day. Population along the route will clearly correlate to this, but other factors (quality of existing roads, options for air, etc etc) will play also.
I would like to see far more transparency in these studies so we understand all this and debate from fact, but commercial interests may argue for VIA not showing its cards. The best we can do is use informed speculation, a questionning attitude, and sometimes a degree of skepticism. What matters most is for VIA to be able to broach and pursue ideas in an entrepreneurial way when they see an opportunity, without political blowback or bureaucratic obstruction. Their take may or not agree with our individual desires, it may be a "say it ain't so" proposition for any specific route opportunity.
- Paul
www.highspeedrailcanada.com
www.transportaction.ca
