News   Apr 01, 2026
Transit Progress and Tall Towers Made Headlines in March, 2026
 273     0 
News   Apr 01, 2026
News Roundup for April 1, 2026
 336     0 
News   Apr 01, 2026
Lombard Canyon
 519     1 

VIA Rail

DirectionNorth said:
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?
Click to expand...
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).
 
^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
 
crs1026 said:
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
Click to expand...
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!
UrbanJon said:
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.
Click to expand...
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.


p_xavier said:
Derisking, or funding the contingency for the CIB I assume.
Click to expand...
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.
nfitz said:
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).
Click to expand...
Not exactly. This could be the estimated needed federal subsidy if HFR is approved.

crs1026 said:
^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
Click to expand...
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 said:
They can put in whatever announcement they want in the budget. Even if it's from a crown agency like the CIB.
Click to expand...
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.
 
Darwinkgo said:
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.
Click to expand...

That's quite the generous interpretation. Until we see more, the pattern with the Liberals on this file isn't exactly reassuring.
 
DirectionNorth said:
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?
Click to expand...

Detailed design and engineering for transit projects is often around 10% of the cost.

Purchasing the corridor from CP also needs to be completed and won't be free.
 
rbt said:
Detailed design and engineering for transit projects is often around 10% of the cost.

Purchasing the corridor from CP also needs to be completed and won't be free.
Click to expand...

Seems odd that they would structure HFR such that Ottawa funds the design from general revenue but requires build-operate from CIB. Also seems odd that they would insert a purchase price in a public document - unless the number has already been agreed to. And, how would the purchase price be spread over six years? It would have to be an up-front expense, so VIA can occupy and begin construction.

- Paul
 
crs1026 said:
Seems odd that they would structure HFR such that Ottawa funds the design from general revenue but requires build-operate from CIB. Also seems odd that they would insert a purchase price in a public document - unless the number has already been agreed to. And, how would the purchase price be spread over six years? It would have to be an up-front expense, so VIA can occupy and begin construction.
Click to expand...

I think VIA is looking for more of an investor (bonds or debt?) rather than an entity to execute on their behalf like REM. That means they'll need a full design and business plan upfront. I expect more traditional tenders.
 
Last edited:
Darwinkgo said:
Not exactly. This could be the estimated needed federal subsidy if HFR is approved.
Click to expand...
They do describe the items in the budget, and it's quite clear from the description that that isn't the case!

Towered said:
I haven't been following this thread much - I'm guessing "high frequency rail" is just a watered down "high speed rail", right?
Click to expand...
It's not even that. It's simply more frequent trains, which aren't necessarily any faster than now. And possibly slower in some cases - certainly slower than the under 4 hour Montreal-Toronto service that VIA has run from time-to-time since the 1970s.

It also might include some different alignments - such as Ottawa-Toronto through Peterborough rather than Kingston. And Toronto-Montreal through Ottawa rather than Kingston. And Quebec City to Montreal through Trois-Rivieres.
 
$500 million can buy things like upgrade stations, track upgrades on the part of the corridor that already exist (Ottawa to Smiths Falls, for example), back end upgrades, corridor purchases, preliminary design & utility relocations, etc.

We'll have to see more details to know. The number is likely based on something more substantial, we will have to wait for that to be released to know.
 
You must log in or register to post here.

Back
Top