VIA Rail

[kEiThZ]

Well, if they come out firmly against it in the election....there will be Quebec seats lost. Those seats may never be CPC friendly, and so nothing really lost....but maybe some impact in Ontario also.

....

I think there's half a chance that CPC will have to say what they are prepared to do, even if it's token....and not just naysay what their opponents are prepared to do.

1) They've mostly written off Quebec. So they don't care about the cost there.

2) They will take the opportunity to try and win seats along the Lakeshore by spinning HFR as taking service away from those communities.

3) Just like their climate plan, they will portray this as unaffordable and offer an affordable "compromise" that will basically gut concept completely. I expect slightly enhanced Lakeshore service as the counteroffer.

4) They'll use the closure of Greyhound to argue that the West and rural areas need more funding for intercity buses and that there's no need to spend billions on VIA.

5) Or they just may not say much at all. Worked for Doug Ford and Donald Trump on so many issues....

I am beyond disappointed at this immature response from someone who is supposed to be a minister-in-waiting. Leaves me with the impression that the CPC just sees VIA Rail as something useless that only Laurentian elites care about.

And when the CPC candidate is reminded that it's investor money, not defiicit money (you can be sure this will be said even if the Liberals are adding some spending to the envelope).....

She isn't a random CPC candidate. She's the shadow Transport Minister. And that was her response.

 

[nfitz]

You're forgetting about the Kingston hub. 12 trains departing in each direction out of Kingston.

I'll believe it when I see it. I just can't see that this is going to happen if they do get HFR going. I hope I'm wrong. I'd be less surprised if they reactivated the 47-mile CP line from Kingston to Sharbot Lake for a shuttle, than 36 departures a day out of Kingston.

Though 12-16 departures a day from Kingston is probably more likely.

 

[nfitz]

Since you use "Toronto English", somebody else can translate for you.

Shouldn't most be using Toronto English on a local Toronto forum?

I did school in Quebec - I understand it - I just suspect that you'd maximize comprehension here by using Canadian English instead of Swiss French. And isn't that the goal, rather than trying to show us all a better way to speak English?

 

[p_xavier]

Shouldn't most be using Toronto English on a local Toronto forum?

I did school in Quebec - I understand it - I just suspect that you'd maximize comprehension here by using Canadian English instead of Swiss French. And isn't that the goal, rather than trying to show us all a better way to speak English?

No, because I find it stupid to continue "norms" that have no logic. And you might find it weird but I did change words in the QC vocabulary at large because I wrote many definitions for QC's conseil du trésor.

 

[Urban Sky]

You're forgetting about the Kingston hub. 12 trains departing in each direction out of Kingston.

I'd be less surprised if they reactivated the 47-mile CP line from Kingston to Sharbot Lake for a shuttle, than 36 departures a day out of Kingston.

Though 12-16 departures a day from Kingston is probably more likely.

He counted Montreal and Ottawa as one direction (12 trains to each city would be more than Kingston - or even Toronto - ever had!), as both routes only split up a further 81 km east. Thus, the promise was for 24 trains, which is not that far from the 12-16 trains you call realistic:

https://twitter.com/x/status/890579315255123968

 

[DirectionNorth]

Not sure if it's been shared but Ellis Don and Aecom are pushing for HSR in Alberta and have signed an MOU with the Gov

https://twitter.com/x/status/1413189548360732672

Sigh. Again? There's been extensive discussion at SSP on this. I don't think the numbers add up, that route doesn't even have train service right now. Getting HFR for them would be what I can get behind.

For all the grumbling, I have to admire YDS for an astute, or perhaps just lucky, strategy for pitching this to the country.

The "original" HFR 1.0 vision was a very bare-bones proposition, with a business case that by all reports has demonstrated an absence of subsidy. The premise was that it could be improved where further investment showed ROI. It was all about attracting investors.

Having considered that, the response of the government has not been to naysay that idea.... but rather to wonder what bells and whistles it can add to make the thing sexier, even if some of the additions aren't within an ROI-based envelope. (Which happens to be how the Liberal side of the house looks at spending generally)

I think the debate (and theres going to be an election in here shortly) won't be the government saying let's build this thing, and the opposition saying don't build it.... rather, the debate may be between one party saying build it, with the bells and whistles....and the other party saying only build the part that was shown as being able to run in the black, ie HFR 1.0.

Where for decades, investment in VIA was considered "unprofitable", most of the critics this week are mostly saying it's not good enough.

If so, that's a wonderful way of having gotten to "yes", guaranteeing something gets approved.

- Paul

I hope that's the case, though this:

I wonder what portion of those critics actually cares about HSR, or whether they are using it as a Trojan Horse argument to mire the whole thing down so that nothing gets done. What getting HFR done would achieve is building the constituency that would care about rail enough to improve it further - and that's something those with against rail doesn't want.

AoD

gets me concerned. Given this country, I would not be surprised if AoD was right.

Well, if they come out firmly against it in the election....there will be Quebec seats lost. Those seats may never be CPC friendly, and so nothing really lost....but maybe some impact in Ontario also.
And when the CPC candidate is reminded that it's investor money, not defiicit money (you can be sure this will be said even if the Liberals are adding some spending to the envelope).....

I think there's half a chance that CPC will have to say what they are prepared to do, even if it's token....and not just naysay what their opponents are prepared to do.

- Paul

Given the CPC's attitude right now, I think they would can this if elected. At 2025 stage, I suspect it will be too late to cancel - I doubt they will be elected this year, given the numbers. And Erin the Tool doesn't inspire confidence (I saw a couple speeches online).

2) They will take the opportunity to try and win seats along the Lakeshore by spinning HFR as taking service away from those communities.

The numbers there were quite close. I'd put this as a wait and see.

3) Just like their climate plan, they will portray this as unaffordable and offer an affordable "compromise" that will basically gut concept completely. I expect slightly enhanced Lakeshore service as the counteroffer.

Unfortunately, I agree.

4) They'll use the closure of Greyhound to argue that the West and rural areas need more funding for intercity buses and that there's no need to spend billions on VIA.

I doubt it. They'll tell the west to suck it on bus funding.

5) Or they just may not say much at all. Worked for Doug Ford and Donald Trump on so many issues....

Unfortunately, the most likely option from them.

I'll believe it when I see it. I just can't see that this is going to happen if they do get HFR going. I hope I'm wrong. I'd be less surprised if they reactivated the 47-mile CP line from Kingston to Sharbot Lake for a shuttle, than 36 departures a day out of Kingston.

Though 12-16 departures a day from Kingston is probably more likely.

Same here, given VIA's history. I doubt even 12-16 departures under that idea. Maybe 5-10.

Shouldn't most be using Toronto English on a local Toronto forum?

I did school in Quebec - I understand it - I just suspect that you'd maximize comprehension here by using Canadian English instead of Swiss French. And isn't that the goal, rather than trying to show us all a better way to speak English?

No, because I find it stupid to continue "norms" that have no logic. And you might find it weird but I did change words in the QC vocabulary at large because I wrote many definitions for QC's conseil du trésor.

This is a really silly debate, though I tend to side with nfitz. When in Rome, do as the Romans do. Even if it's stupid.

 

[p_xavier]

This is a really silly debate, though I tend to side with nfitz. When in Rome, do as the Romans do. Even if it's stupid.

While I don't like QC for many things, their language uniformity efforts I applaud. They made many unique terms that aren't even used in France, courriel, rançongiciel etc. Romans lost eventually.

 

[Urban Sky]

No, because I find it stupid to continue "norms" that have no logic.

Then I'm not sure why you bother discussing here in a language* which largely defies logic and universal rules (especially when it comes to spelling and pronounciation)...

While I don't like QC for many things, their language uniformity efforts I applaud. They made many unique terms that aren't even used in France, courriel, rançongiciel etc.

And as much as I also appreciate their linguistic non-conformism, they get mercilessly ridiculed for it by many French from France who live in Quebec like it still was their colony...

*Edit: since it seems to not have been clear enough: I'm obviously taking about English, whereas my French teacher always insisted that the language she taught was basically "like mathematics"...

 

[p_xavier]

Then I'm not sure why you bother discussing here in a language which largely defies logic and universal rules (especially when it comes to spelling and pronounciation)...

SI is supposed to be the universal language but it's your thing if you differ. Many agree that miles are better than kilometeres. If you're talking about French why are you still in Montréal then?

 

[Garuda]

Well that’s one way to fend off dropping poll numbers. But as the line runs through UCP heartland and property will be required and many roads closed I’m curious if this will make it to the construction phase.

Not sure if it's been shared but Ellis Don and Aecom are pushing for HSR in Alberta and have signed an MOU with the Gov

https://twitter.com/x/status/1413189548360732672

 

[p_xavier]

Well that’s one way to fend off dropping poll numbers. But as the line runs through UCP heartland and property will be required and many roads closed I’m curious if this will make it to the construction phase.

I thought that hyperloop had better chances than HSR there.

 

[nfitz]

He counted Montreal and Ottawa as one direction (12 trains to each city would be more than Kingston - or even Toronto - ever had!), as both routes only split up a further 81 km east. This, the promise was for 24 trains, which is not that far from the 12-16 trains you call realistic:

50% to 66.7% ...

https://twitter.com/x/status/890579315255123968

Does that graphic imply that VIA has purchased the line from Kitchener to London? Did I miss that?

 

[henrydm]

No, because I find it stupid to continue "norms" that have no logic. And you might find it weird but I did change words in the QC vocabulary at large because I wrote many definitions for QC's conseil du trésor.

this is a via rail forum, not English grammar class.

 

[Urban Sky]

50% to 66.7% ...

50-66.7% (rather than 33.3-44.4%) of the promised frequency, or the other way around, the promise is just 1.5-2 (rather than 2.25-3) times higher than what you deem realistic. Considering how chronically sceptical, pessimistic or even cynical you appear about most things being discussed here, 50-66.7% makes you look almost euphoric...

Does that graphic imply that VIA has purchased the line from Kitchener to London? Did I miss that?

No, the orange is for GEXR (note that the map is from 2017), whereas yellow is for VIA...

 

[p_xavier]

this is a via rail forum, not English grammar class.

Say that to your fellow forumers, I don't care but won't change my acronyms.