News   Jul 05, 2024
 3K     0 
News   Jul 05, 2024
 2K     13 
News   Jul 05, 2024
 709     0 

Via targets private financing with eye toward speed upgrades

M II A II R II K

Senior Member
Member Bio
Joined
Apr 24, 2007
Messages
3,944
Reaction score
1,061
Via targets private financing with eye toward speed upgrades


Sep. 14 2012

By RICHARD BLACKWELL

Read More: http://www.theglobeandmail.com/repo...ith-eye-toward-speed-upgrades/article4544047/


Via Rail Canada Inc. wants to team up with private-sector investors to pay for expensive upgrades to passenger rail service in the key Montreal-Ottawa-Toronto corridor – with ambitions to build a long dreamt of high-speed connection. Via chief executive officer Marc Laliberté said in an interview Thursday that if the Crown corporation can make progress in improving service on its key routes, it could attract private financing for new investments requiring deeper pockets.

Most of the high-speed rail expansion in Europe is now done through private-public partnerships, he said, and the same thing could happen in Canada. “This is something we need to look at.†But first, Via has to make enough improvements to show it can make money on its existing track, Mr. Laliberté said. After that foundation is in place, further upgrades to increase speeds – and perhaps dedicated high-speed tracks – could be considered. “If you can bring in a service that attracts a lot of customers and you can make it profitable, then private money could be [attracted to it],†Mr. Laliberté said.

Ideally, he said, the private sector funds would be used to “finance, design, build and maintain†new infrastructure, while “we can operate it.†He noted that big Canadian institutional investors, such as pension funds, seem very interested in ploughing more money into infrastructure projects, so a potentially profitable domestic rail service could glean their interest as well. Indeed, some large Canadian funds have already bought into high-speed rail projects in other countries. In 2010, Ontario Teachers’ Pension Plan and Borealis Infrastructure – an arm of the Ontario Municipal Employees Retirement System – paid $3.4-billion for the right to run High Speed One, the rail link from London, England, to the mouth of the channel tunnel. Currently, Via loses money on most of its services, although the busiest routes in the Windsor-to-Quebec corridor come closest to breaking even.

.....
 
The devil is in the details - how this is actually executed and whether the private investment actually results in better outcomes for passengers - but I generally support this move.

I support this move for a cynical reason, and that is my realization that conservative governments are more willing to spend public money to attract business investment than to improve the services if it was run by the government itself. This would be the case even if more money was spent and the outcome was ultimately the same (i.e. less efficient). Conservative governments are all about means, and not ends. So, while VIA would have a tough time lobbying for public money to upgrade the corridor if it was running it itself, I believe it will have an easy time getting the same amount of taxpayer money - or more - if private capital has some interest in the outcome. If the outcome is faster, better trains, the cynic in me says we should accept this Faustian bargain.
 
One wonders if someone mildly clever in VIA High Command has noted that the feds have money to give away for P3 projects that would otherwise not be available to VIA? Perhaps further upgrades to the Alexandria Sub but privately financed this time?
 
High speed rail (the 300km/h kind) is very costly, hardly ever profitable and normally requires large amounts of taxpayer subsidy. A Toronto-Ottawa-Montreal high speed rail line will never achieve the ridership of Tokyo-Nagoya-Osaka or Paris-Lyon (the latter serves trips between Paris and many French cities, not just Lyon). It is possible that a private partner could finance part of the cost, paid for by fare revenue but it would require large taxpayer subsidies.

The priority needs to be to improve commuter rail in the GTA and the Montreal area, and short distance train service like Toronto-Kitchener and Toronto-Niagara (which VIA is ironically cutting). This is where traffic congestion is the worst.
 
I expect we'll be seeing GO Transit taking on more of those short-haul runs, with Corridor service closer to the GTA reduced further and further. If GO does indeed become a regional rail service, it wouldn't surprise me if they started taking over parts of the Corridor itself and replacing VIA entirely.
 
I wonder if they're maybe considering building a new line from Kingston (or another nearby point on the 401 corridor) to Ottawa, so that they can run the Toronto-Ottawa and Toronto-Montreal trains as a single service via Ottawa.

Build the corridor so that it is HSR-ready for when the time comes to upgrade it.

Interesting development with the PPP though.
 
Even if not high speed rail, trains with cruising speeds of 200km/h and above would be nice (currently Via trains tend to cruise at 160km/h). If anything needs upgrading, it is Amtrak in the US. There is no reason why train should take 50% longer than a bus on most intercity trips.

Yup. Even if they manage to cut the Toronto-Ottawa trip from 4hrs to 3hrs, that still means that a) they can run more trips per day without increasing the number of trains, and b) each train can carry more people in a given day, increasing profitability. Yes, fuel consumption would increase too, but I'm guessing that having each train be able to do 1 extra run within each service crew's shift would be a pretty big bump to VIA's bottom line.
 
Plus a much more competitive service.. It's a win win.

Any news that could lead to improved intercity service is most welcome.

I would love, however, to know what impact Porter has had on Via. Considering Via's nutso insistence on airline-style boarding procedures at Union (as opposed to the model used virtually everywhere else in the world of trusting passengers to find the right platform and car unaided), a downtown air departure is pretty darned competitive.

Dealing with that kind of low-hanging fruit could probably improve Via's attractiveness and efficiency considerably.

I am also very eager to see GO become more of a regional service. Canada is currently making a strong challenge for the title of developed country with the absolute worst rail system. That a place like London, Ont wouldn't be connected to Toronto with a train every hour or so would even shock Americans. (Europeans, meanwhile, would also be hocked it's not connected to Hamilton). The Northeast Corridor provides excellent service even to smaller centres like New Haven and Wilmington.

To my mind GO (and in Quebec the AMT) are really our only hope of decent rail service. In a huge country that hates to be seen favouring 'Central Canada' Via is just never going to rate as a federal priority. The governments of the regions that benefit from rail need to build it themselves.
 
I would love, however, to know what impact Porter has had on Via. Considering Via's nutso insistence on airline-style boarding procedures at Union (as opposed to the model used virtually everywhere else in the world of trusting passengers to find the right platform and car unaided), a downtown air departure is pretty darned competitive.

This. As someone who travels between Cobourg and Toronto often this is one the main reasons I don't take Via but rather drive to Oshawa and take the GO Train. The boarding procedures Via has at Union are ridiculous. Stand in a big huge line for an hour and get treated like a 2 year old. Major nuisance. With GO on the other hand you can show up 5 minutes before departure and hop on the train with no hassle. I realize they are 2 different types of services being provided but the Via way of doing things seems rather pointless and negates one of the advantages of traveling by rail.
 
This. As someone who travels between Cobourg and Toronto often this is one the main reasons I don't take Via but rather drive to Oshawa and take the GO Train. The boarding procedures Via has at Union are ridiculous. Stand in a big huge line for an hour and get treated like a 2 year old. Major nuisance. With GO on the other hand you can show up 5 minutes before departure and hop on the train with no hassle. I realize they are 2 different types of services being provided but the Via way of doing things seems rather pointless and negates one of the advantages of traveling by rail.

I don't get it. You can show up 5 minutes before your Via departure and just climb right onboard without any issues or delays as the large line will already have boarded. People stand in line for a good seat or a seat with the people they are travelling with; but if you have a ticket with VIA you are guaranteed a seat which cannot be said for GO (lots standing for popular runs).

Arriving early is only really necessary if you have baggage to check.

If you have a 5 hour journey, it's worth waiting in line for a good seat. If you've got a 45 minute trip then you probably don't care and are willing to sit in whatever is remaining.
 
Last edited:
This. As someone who travels between Cobourg and Toronto often this is one the main reasons I don't take Via but rather drive to Oshawa and take the GO Train. The boarding procedures Via has at Union are ridiculous. Stand in a big huge line for an hour and get treated like a 2 year old. Major nuisance. With GO on the other hand you can show up 5 minutes before departure and hop on the train with no hassle. I realize they are 2 different types of services being provided but the Via way of doing things seems rather pointless and negates one of the advantages of traveling by rail.
I don't take VIA regularly these days, but I used to always show up 5-minutes before departure. I generally considered I'd failed, if I got there while there was still a line-up to board.

Why show up an hour early? I've only done that when changing trains.
 
Still, the nanny state should really let us go up and wait on the platform. Particularly with the new roof.
 

Back
Top