VIA Rail network developments

[1overcosc]

Originally Posted by acottawa

I wonder how long the CN service would last, certainly east of Kingston, without the Toronto-Ottawa-Montreal traffic.

Toronto-Kingston demand is actually quite high (a lot higher than you'd expect given Kingston's population) but you're right that maintaining service east of Kingston towards Ottawa & Montreal would be challenging without the big 3 feeding into it.

However, VIA has said that service availability from Kingston to all 3 of Ottawa/Toronto/Montreal will be boosted in the HFR age--making specific announcements about plans to fill in existing gaps in the schedule for Kingston-Ottawa service, notably--so clearly they've got something up their sleeve.

Separate services for Kingston-Toronto, Kingston-Montreal, and Kingston-Ottawa, with the latter two run with DMUs, may be what they're planning.

[roger1818]

Originally Posted by 1overcosc

Separate services for Kingston-Toronto, Kingston-Montreal, and Kingston-Ottawa, with the latter two run with DMUs, may be what they're planning.

The value of continuing to provide direct Kingston-Montreal is low. Another option is to use the high frequency of HFR and have people connect in Ottawa (or even Smiths Falls) instead.

[acottawa]

Originally Posted by 1overcosc

Toronto-Kingston demand is actually quite high (a lot higher than you'd expect given Kingston's population) but you're right that maintaining service east of Kingston towards Ottawa & Montreal would be challenging without the big 3 feeding into it.

However, VIA has said that service availability from Kingston to all 3 of Ottawa/Toronto/Montreal will be boosted in the HFR age--making specific announcements about plans to fill in existing gaps in the schedule for Kingston-Ottawa service, notably--so clearly they've got something up their sleeve.

Separate services for Kingston-Toronto, Kingston-Montreal, and Kingston-Ottawa, with the latter two run with DMUs, may be what they're planning.

The thing is that Via doesn't have anything up its sleeve. It has a tiny capital budget. If Via wants to operate a DMU service out of Kingston it has to ask the government for money to buy DMUs, and then ask for an increase in its budget to pay for it. They might, but the ridership would be pretty low, Kingston is not a swing riding, and such an expenditure might not be popular amongst other MPs whose ridings have lost service in recent years.

[roger1818]

Originally Posted by acottawa

The thing is that Via doesn't have anything up its sleeve. It has a tiny capital budget. If Via wants to operate a DMU service out of Kingston it has to ask the government for money to buy DMUs, and then ask for an increase in its budget to pay for it. They might, but the ridership would be pretty low, Kingston is not a swing riding, and such an expenditure might not be popular amongst other MPs whose ridings have lost service in recent years.

I agree that it is unlikely that VIA will purchase shiny new DMUs. That doesn't mean all service along the lakeshore will be eliminated either. VIA could keep the Toronto-Ottawa (via Kingston) route running using the new equipment purchased for HFR. GO will likely be electrifying their track (which VIA uses) to Oshawa and the track shared with HFR will likely also be electrified, so using HFR equipment makes the most sense.

In fact, looking at the VIA map again, it shows that all of the stations from Guildwood to Brockville are labeled as "Existing Improved" where as Cornwall and Coteau are labeled as "Same." I am not sure exactly what is meant by this (are the stations going to be improved, the level of service or the track?) but at a minimum it implies that service along the Lakeshore will be preserved.

[acottawa]

Originally Posted by roger1818

I agree that it is unlikely that VIA will purchase shiny new DMUs. That doesn't mean all service along the lakeshore will be eliminated either. VIA could keep the Toronto-Ottawa (via Kingston) route running using the new equipment purchased for HFR. GO will likely be electrifying their track (which VIA uses) to Oshawa and the track shared with HFR will likely also be electrified, so using HFR equipment makes the most sense.

In fact, looking at the VIA map again, it shows that all of the stations from Guildwood to Brockville are labeled as "Existing Improved" where as Cornwall and Coteau are labeled as "Same." I am not sure exactly what is meant by this (are the stations going to be improved, the level of service or the track?) but at a minimum it implies that service along the Lakeshore will be preserved.

Via uses CN, not GO track between Pickering and Oshawa.

I agree that some service on the lakeshore will be continued (and posted speculation to that effect a few days ago). I just find it unlikely (although anything is possible) that Via would try to maintain existing levels of service (which are dependant on through traffic that will disappear) or seek to make expensive rolling stock purchases.

Via funding is the toughest thing to get in Ottawa. There are no lobby groups of any significance, only a smalll number of Canadians take Via with any frequency and Via fails most cost benefit analysis. Every PM since the first Trudeau has cut Via service and the few funding tranches it has received has been for bare bones type improvements. In this context, telling cabinet you want big bucks to relocate the Toronto-Ottawa-Montreal service to a new line, and then telling cabinet you want further big bucks to replace service to the lakeshore will lead cabinet to the obvious conclusion that the mainline service should stay on the lakeshore and maybe throw a few dollars for improvements for the existing service.

[Horus]

This story from the Kingston Whig-Standard has some relevant information about the continued use of the existing Via routes. [Emphasis mine]

Via confirms proposed rail route

By Elliot Ferguson, Kingston Whig-Standard
Thursday, July 20, 2017 8:13:16 EDT PM

Train service along the existing Via Rail line could be improved as part of a proposal to build a dedicated passenger route, a company spokesperson said.

The plan, in its early stages, would see the Crown corporation build a new rail route between Toronto and Ottawa as part of a larger line from Windsor to Quebec City.

On Wednesday morning, Frontenac County council endorsed a resolution from the Eastern Ontario Wardens' Caucus (EOWC) that called on the federal and Ontario governments to financially support the high-frequency rail project.

A map of the proposed route showed the new rail line passing through Tweed, Sharbot Lake and Smiths Falls.

"One of the options under consideration by Via Rail includes the Shining Waters Railway Plan, which aims to provide passenger service from Toronto to Ottawa through Smiths Falls, using existing or discontinued railroad rights of way," Via Rail spokesperson Mariam Diaby wrote in an email to the Whig-Standard on Thursday.

"There are several options for stops along the route being considered, it would be premature to comment further at this time."

The plan is meant to allow Via to operate trains on a more frequent basis, solving what the company says is the biggest obstacle to travellers choosing the train.

Via trains currently run on tracks owned by Canadian National Rail, which limits how often the passenger trains can run.

A new passenger route would benefit communities along the existing Via route, Diaby added.

"For the existing routes, residents along the Toronto-Kingston-Montreal-Quebec corridor will see improved scheduling and service tailored to their community's needs," Diaby wrote.

The plan was submitted to Via Rail's shareholder in December 2016 and is currently under review by the federal government, Diaby stated.

[Truenorth00]

Originally Posted by acottawa

The thing is that Via doesn't have anything up its sleeve. It has a tiny capital budget. If Via wants to operate a DMU service out of Kingston it has to ask the government for money to buy DMUs, and then ask for an increase in its budget to pay for it. They might, but the ridership would be pretty low, Kingston is not a swing riding, and such an expenditure might not be popular amongst other MPs whose ridings have lost service in recent years.

Undoubtedly, if any service is to be maintained, the government will have to pony up. But I think it's not just Kingston driving this but all the towns and cities along the Lakeshore outside the GTA and Montreal now facing loss of service.

If we roughly assume 6 hr roundtrips from Kingston to each of Toronto, Ottawa, and Montreal, they'd need about 15 two-car DMU trains (for 12 trips per day per corridor). That's a bit of an investment (I'd say about $120 million at $4 mil per DMU). But I don't think operating costs would be all that high. DMUs are cheaper to operate, usually pretty fuel efficient. Trackage fees should be slightly lower since they aren't running six car trains too. And I'd argue they can even cut frequencies to about 8-10 per day (more to Toronto and Ottawa, less to Montreal), if they time the frequencies to better serve rural commuters.

You look at other jurisdictions with similar contexts elsewhere. And they pretty much use DMUs for exactly this context.

[acottawa]

Originally Posted by Truenorth00

Undoubtedly, if any service is to be maintained, the government will have to pony up. But I think it's not just Kingston driving this but all the towns and cities along the Lakeshore outside the GTA and Montreal now facing loss of service.

If we roughly assume 6 hr roundtrips from Kingston to each of Toronto, Ottawa, and Montreal, they'd need about 15 two-car DMU trains (for 12 trips per day per corridor). That's a bit of an investment (I'd say about $120 million at $4 mil per DMU). But I don't think operating costs would be all that high. DMUs are cheaper to operate, usually pretty fuel efficient. Trackage fees should be slightly lower since they aren't running six car trains too. And I'd argue they can even cut frequencies to about 8-10 per day (more to Toronto and Ottawa, less to Montreal), if they time the frequencies to better serve rural commuters.

You look at other jurisdictions with similar contexts elsewhere. And they pretty much use DMUs for exactly this context.

I'm not saying it isn't possible, I'm saying the politics are terrible. Via is trying to make the case that the lakeshore line is too crowded and too unreliable and therefore a new $4B line is necessary. Then to turnaround and say that there are no capacity or reliable issues on the same line to implement a new DMU service makes HFR a much more difficult sell (and the status quo more appealing). Moreover, it is one thing to tell an MP from Vancouver Island, the prairies, Cape Breton, SW Ontario, etc., that there is a need to prioritize transportation among the 1st, 2nd and 4th biggest cities in Canada over their region. It is another thing to tell the same MPs there is a need to prioritize the 25th, 40th and 74th and 112th biggest cities over their region.

[Norman Bates]

Originally Posted by acottawa

Via funding is the toughest thing to get in Ottawa. There are no lobby groups of any significance, only a smalll number of Canadians take Via with any frequency and Via fails most cost benefit analysis. Every PM since the first Trudeau has cut Via service and the few funding tranches it has received has been for bare bones type improvements. In this context, telling cabinet you want big bucks to relocate the Toronto-Ottawa-Montreal service to a new line, and then telling cabinet you want further big bucks to replace service to the lakeshore will lead cabinet to the obvious conclusion that the mainline service should stay on the lakeshore and maybe throw a few dollars for improvements for the existing service.

Repeated for emphasis.

[roger1818]

Originally Posted by acottawa

I'm not saying it isn't possible, I'm saying the politics are terrible. Via is trying to make the case that the lakeshore line is too crowded and too unreliable and therefore a new $4B line is necessary. Then to turnaround and say that there are no capacity or reliable issues on the same line to implement a new DMU service makes HFR a much more difficult sell (and the status quo more appealing).

I agree that if they are presented as two different plans, it won't come across well. However, if they are spun as feeder routes to the HFR line (which they appear to be doing), it could work.

Having said that, while I see the advanteges of using DMUs, I suspect they won't as it is easier to buy and maintain one type of equipment for the region. They can justify ordering more than they need for HFR by claiming they are replacing the entire fleet and then continue to use the old equipment in Southern Ontario until such time as Ontario decides to implement its HSR plan (if that ever happens) and let them buy the equipment for that.

Moreover, it is one thing to tell an MP from Vancouver Island, the prairies, Cape Breton, SW Ontario, etc., that there is a need to prioritize transportation among the 1st, 2nd and 4th biggest cities in Canada over their region. It is another thing to tell the same MPs there is a need to prioritize the 25th, 40th and 74th and 112th biggest cities over their region.

You are forgetting that the lake shore route connects those smaller cities to the 1st, 2nd and 5th largest CMAs. That counts for something. None of the other routes can claim anything close to that.

[Truenorth00]

Originally Posted by acottawa

I'm not saying it isn't possible, I'm saying the politics are terrible. Via is trying to make the case that the lakeshore line is too crowded and too unreliable and therefore a new $4B line is necessary. Then to turnaround and say that there are no capacity or reliable issues on the same line to implement a new DMU service makes HFR a much more difficult sell (and the status quo more appealing).

I don't see the issue here. The freight traffic places a severe limit on frequencies and speeds which impacts the bulk of the traffic going between Toronto, Ottawa and Montreal. HFR is needed to address that traffic (and the potential increase in ridership).

On the other hand, the frequencies of VIA Corridor are more than adequate today for the cities along the Lakeshore aside from the major metros. So maintaining them shouldn't be much of an issue.

Originally Posted by acottawa

Moreover, it is one thing to tell an MP from Vancouver Island, the prairies, Cape Breton, SW Ontario, etc., that there is a need to prioritize transportation among the 1st, 2nd and 4th biggest cities in Canada over their region. It is another thing to tell the same MPs there is a need to prioritize the 25th, 40th and 74th and 112th biggest cities over their region.

Sure. But it really depends on how this whole thing is sold. We are also going through a massive increase infrastructure funding and an apparent infusion of private capital through the infrastructure bank. Is that Cape Breton MP or Vancouver Island MP really going to pick apart investment in an Ontario rail line when the government is also putting in money for a new highway or hospital in his riding? I doubt there will be many complaints if HFR is mostly funded through the CIB and the only government investment going in is for the DMUs.

[Truenorth00]

Originally Posted by roger1818

I agree that if they are presented as two different plans, it won't come across well. However, if they are spun as feeder routes to the HFR line (which they appear to be doing), it could work.

More than that. I see this being put in to the HFR project as part of the whole thing. If not, why is VIA still saying they'll service these towns? Their rolling stock is approaching EOL, so after HFR, they won't be operating if they don't buy something else.

Originally Posted by roger1818

Having said that, while I see the advanteges of using DMUs, I suspect they won't as it is easier to buy and maintain one type of equipment for the region. They can justify ordering more than they need for HFR by claiming they are replacing the entire fleet and then continue to use the old equipment in Southern Ontario until such time as Ontario decides to implement its HSR plan (if that ever happens) and let them buy the equipment for that.

I disagree. Two different fleets will absolutely be necessary. Whatever they buy for HFR will be way too big for the Lakeshore services. And if they do electrify HFR, then it won't even be compatible with the Lakeshore.

Originally Posted by roger1818

You are forgetting that the lake shore route connects those smaller cities to the 1st, 2nd and 5th largest CMAs. That counts for something. None of the other routes can claim anything close to that.

Exactly. That said, I think VIA (and the government) will have to commit to improvements in Atlantic Canada and some plan for the Edmonton-Calgary corridor at some point.

[acottawa]

Originally Posted by roger1818

I agree that if they are presented as two different plans, it won't come across well. However, if they are spun as feeder routes to the HFR line (which they appear to be doing), it could work.

Having said that, while I see the advanteges of using DMUs, I suspect they won't as it is easier to buy and maintain one type of equipment for the region. They can justify ordering more than they need for HFR by claiming they are replacing the entire fleet and then continue to use the old equipment in Southern Ontario until such time as Ontario decides to implement its HSR plan (if that ever happens) and let them buy the equipment for that.



You are forgetting that the lake shore route connects those smaller cities to the 1st, 2nd and 5th largest CMAs. That counts for something. None of the other routes can claim anything close to that.

How could a lakeshore service be a feeder route for HFR? They run parallel and only connect at the ends. If they wanted feeder services for HFR they would run services to places like Pembroke, Cambridge, Niagara and Sherbrooke or they would need to build (or reactivate) a new North-South line, connecting Belleville to tweed, for example.

The 4th largest CMA has no Via service at all, the 3rd, 6th, 8th, and 13th are only served by long distance trains that come every few days and the 15th largest CMA lost its Via service a few years ago because nobody will fix the tracks, so I think moving eastern Ontario to the front of the line would cause problems.

[acottawa]

Originally Posted by Truenorth00

More than that. I see this being put in to the HFR project as part of the whole thing. If not, why is VIA still saying they'll service these towns? Their rolling stock is approaching EOL, so after HFR, they won't be operating if they don't buy something else.

Via can still service these towns without an expensive new scheme.

Via just spent hundreds of millions to refurbish most of its rolling stock. If failure of the rolling stock is imminent then there is a more serious problem than the frequency of service to Kingston.

[acottawa]

Originally Posted by Truenorth00

I don't see the issue here. The freight traffic places a severe limit on frequencies and speeds which impacts the bulk of the traffic going between Toronto, Ottawa and Montreal. HFR is needed to address that traffic (and the potential increase in ridership).

On the other hand, the frequencies of VIA Corridor are more than adequate today for the cities along the Lakeshore aside from the major metros. So maintaining them shouldn't be much of an issue.

Via (and proponents of HFR) keep complaining that the freight traffic is leading to major delays and other problems. It will be a big challenge to explain how the DMU service will have few problems sharing the track with freight. Anything Via can say that will assuage concerns about the DMU service reduces its case for the need for HFR.

This is why rail projects in Canada constantly fail, they get too expensive and too convoluted and politicians find it easier to do nothing then sort out the projects.

Originally Posted by Truenorth00

Sure. But it really depends on how this whole thing is sold. We are also going through a massive increase infrastructure funding and an apparent infusion of private capital through the infrastructure bank. Is that Cape Breton MP or Vancouver Island MP really going to pick apart investment in an Ontario rail line when the government is also putting in money for a new highway or hospital in his riding?

That's not how politics normally works.

Originally Posted by Truenorth00

I doubt there will be many complaints if HFR is mostly funded through the CIB and the only government investment going in is for the DMUs.

The CIB is still the federal government. It has a limited pot of resources that must be fought over by projects across the country.

[roger1818]

Originally Posted by Truenorth00

Also, these services will be far cheaper to run, while possibly even allowing for a boost in frequencies from today:

Toronto-Kingston (13 trips)
Montreal-Kingston (11 trips)
Ottawa-Kingston (9 trips)

As a comparison, I had a look at the current departures from Kinston. On a typical weekday there are:

• Kingston-Toronto = 16 departures (8 from Ottawa, 6 from Montreal, 1 from Montreal via Ottawa and 1 originating from Kingston)
• Kingston-Ottawa = 8 departures (one continues to Montreal)
• Kingston-Montreal = 5 departures

(for those wondering why there are more western than eastern departures, there are two additional eastern express trains that don't stop in Kingston and one train terminates at Kingston)

The average time between departures from Kingston-Toronto is about an hour (between 5:30am and 9:20pm; however, since it is the merging of two routes, the spacing of the departures are not optimal. There are trains 10, 21 and 30 minutes apart, which are more frequent than necessary. If you take those departures out of the equation, the average time between departure is closer to 1:20. As a result, Truenorth00's 13 departures is similar to current service level, but will slightly reduce the load on CN.

For Kingston-Ottawa, the average time between trains is about 1:45. Increasing from 8 to 9 departures makes sense as it could be used to extend the day (an earlier departure from Kingston and a later departure from Ottawa).

Regarding Kingston-Montreal, increasing from 5 to 11 departures is not likely. It is more likely for them to increase the Kingston-Ottawa frequency and have Montreal bound passengers transfer (or have trains continue along the HFR route). While the southern route might be faster, it wouldn't be as reliable and the high frequency of service along HFR would be attractive to travelers. As a result, it's primary purpose would be to serve Cornwall and Coteau (both very small), so even maintaining the current 5 departures would be surprising.

[roger1818]

Originally Posted by Truenorth00

I disagree. Two different fleets will absolutely be necessary. Whatever they buy for HFR will be way too big for the Lakeshore services. And if they do electrify HFR, then it won't even be compatible with the Lakeshore.

One or two card trains would have similar capacities to DMUs. Sure it won't be as fuel efficient, but it will provide operational efficiencies. As for electrification, I gather the plan would be to buy dual mode locomotives, so they could be used on either line.

Originally Posted by acottawa

How could a lakeshore service be a feeder route for HFR? They run parallel and only connect at the ends.

No, they also connect at Smiths Falls and Montreal (HFR extends to Quebec City).

Originally Posted by acottawa

The 4th largest CMA has no Via service at all, the 3rd, 6th, 8th, and 13th are only served by long distance trains that come every few days and the 15th largest CMA lost its Via service a few years ago because nobody will fix the tracks, so I think moving eastern Ontario to the front of the line would cause problems.

Ranking is a bit misleading as there is a huge drop in population between the 2nd and 3rd, as well as the 3rd and 4th, plus the 6th and 7th. The top 15 2016 CMA populations are as follows (from Wikipedia):

1 - 5,928,040 - Toronto (Mississauga, Brampton)
2 - 4,098,927 - Montreal (Laval)
3 - 2,463,431 - Vancouver (Surrey)
4 - 1,392,609 - Calgary
5 - 1,323,783 - Ottawa–Gatineau
6 - 1,321,426 - Edmonton
7 - 800,296 - Quebec City (Lévis)
8 - 778,489 - Winnipeg
9 - 747,545 - Hamilton (Burlington)
10 - 523,894 - Kitchener–Cambridge–Waterloo
11 - 494,069 - London
12 - 406,074 - St. Catharines - Niagara (Niagara Falls, Welland)
13 - 403,390 - Halifax
14 - 379,848 - Oshawa (Whitby, Clarington)
15 - 367,770 - Victoria (Saanich)

Also, the funny thing about inter-city rail service is it serves two cities, not one. You need to have two large cities between about 100 and 600 km of each other to make a reasonable rails service (less than that and it falls in the realm of commuter rail and more than that, travel times become too long). While I have thought Calgary(#4) and Edmonton(#6) should have inter-city rail for years, Vancouver(#3) is quite isolated (Abbotsford is too close) and the mountainous terrain limit the rail speed without significant investment in track upgrades for the nearest cities (Kamloops(#36) and Kelowna(#22)).

The E&N is a loss, but we are looking at connecting Victoria (#15) with Nanaimo(#35) and Courtney/Comox(#61). Operationally it was worth running, but as soon as it required significant capital expenditure, the numbers didn't make sense.

Originally Posted by acottawa

Via just spent hundreds of millions to refurbish most of its rolling stock. If failure of the rolling stock is imminent then there is a more serious problem than the frequency of service to Kingston.

VIA only refurbished the LRT's, which is about half of the corridor fleet. The Renaissance cars are at EOL and VIA says that because they were not designed for use in our climate, they likely are not worth refurbishing (they are also the most expensive cars in the fleet to operate). The HEP cars are also in need of an update, and while it could be done, they have a vintage look, not becoming of a modern service and while attractive to railfans, they are a hard sell to the general public. Even the LRC's while they have just been refurbished and will last another 15 years, VIA claims that that they cannot be refurbished again. Given the lead times involved in getting approvals, bidding and then construction, the time to act is now if we want to replace them before they start to fail.

[kwoldtimer]

Is a decision on funding for the VIA proposal expected sometime this year?

[acottawa]

Originally Posted by roger1818

No, they also connect at Smiths Falls and Montreal (HFR extends to Quebec City).

Montreal is a pretty inefficient connection (how many people want to go from Lake Ontario area to Eastern Quebec?).

It is unclear what will connect at Smith's Falls.

Originally Posted by roger1818

Also, the funny thing about inter-city rail service is it serves two cities, not one. You need to have two large cities between about 100 and 600 km of each other to make a reasonable rails service (less than that and it falls in the realm of commuter rail and more than that, travel times become too long). While I have thought Calgary(#4) and Edmonton(#6) should have inter-city rail for years, Vancouver(#3) is quite isolated (Abbotsford is too close) and the mountainous terrain limit the rail speed without significant investment in track upgrades for the nearest cities (Kamloops(#36) and Kelowna(#22)).

The E&N is a loss, but we are looking at connecting Victoria (#15) with Nanaimo(#35) and Courtney/Comox(#61). Operationally it was worth running, but as soon as it required significant capital expenditure, the numbers didn't make sense.

Many of those city pairs would have higher demand than Kingston/Belleville/Cobourg/Brockville-Montreal or Kingston/Belleville/Cobourg/Brockville-Ottawa

If the objective is to build brand new rolling stock for a high frequency service then certainly MPs from other parts of the country will be asking why that is the highest priority for capital expenditure.

Originally Posted by roger1818

VIA only refurbished the LRT's, which is about half of the corridor fleet. The Renaissance cars are at EOL and VIA says that because they were not designed for use in our climate, they likely are not worth refurbishing (they are also the most expensive cars in the fleet to operate). The HEP cars are also in need of an update, and while it could be done, they have a vintage look, not becoming of a modern service and while attractive to railfans, they are a hard sell to the general public. Even the LRC's while they have just been refurbished and will last another 15 years, VIA claims that that they cannot be refurbished again. Given the lead times involved in getting approvals, bidding and then construction, the time to act is now if we want to replace them before they start to fail.

Locomotives, LRC rolling stock and HEP rolling stock have all been refurbished within the last decade.

http://m.viarail.ca/sites/all/files/...Investment.pdf

If HFR is implemented with new rolling stock, even without the Renaissance cars there will still be lots of rolling stock kicking around for a lakeshore service.

[Truenorth00]

Originally Posted by acottawa

Via (and proponents of HFR) keep complaining that the freight traffic is leading to major delays and other problems. It will be a big challenge to explain how the DMU service will have few problems sharing the track with freight. Anything Via can say that will assuage concerns about the DMU service reduces its case for the need for HFR.

I don't know if my point is unclear. What I meant was that the DMU service is defensible in that it provides service to the Lakeshore communities. That service would definitely not be as reliable as HFR and I don't think anybody has said it would be. It would have the exact same issues they have with service today. The alternative, of course could well be no service or dramatically reduced service (which will happen if they are sticking with 6 car trains).

Originally Posted by acottawa

That's not how politics normally works.

So MPs routinely vote against every project that doesn't directly benefit their community? I think that's a stretch too.

Originally Posted by acottawa

The CIB is still the federal government. It has a limited pot of resources that must be fought over by projects across the country.

Sure. But the CIB is supposed to be bringing in a lot of private capital for projects like this. I don't think the plan is for VIA to get $4-6 billion in public funds.