Toronto-Quebec City High-Speed Rail

[ExFlyer]

2 hours ago, Zeitgeist said:

The rest of the country matters very much, but don’t forget that the Quebec-Windsor corridor is one of the most significant economic zones in the West after the Boston-Washington corridor.  We have to consolidate the strength of our wealth-generating areas by connecting them.  In fact, it’s part of our nation-building because it enhances the movement of people, goods and services, just like removing interprovincial trade barriers. Otherwise we continue to orient ourselves south, economically, culturally, and perhaps eventually politically, but Canada would be overpowered by Washington in any political union.

Think of it this way: Let’s become as unified and strong as we can as a country before we seriously consider further economic union and integration with the U.S.  Further connecting Canada West and East, Ontario and Quebec, creates a significant economic and political bulwark against foreign influence.  The Maritimes are similarly bicultural.  The West can benefit from this large market to the east through new east-flowing pipelines.  It can also draw talent from the well-educated and highly skilled workforces of central Canada.

I would also suggest greater union between Alberta and BC through more resource and transport infrastructure, as well as removing trade barriers, to further unify these regions which can be very different politically. Greater union neutralizes the left and right-wing political extremes. Otherwise Alberta remains oriented towards and dependent on Texas while BC continues down the path of orientation towards Seattle and Cascadia.  The West should be thinking about exporting resources towards Pacific Rim countries as well as eastern markets in Canada and domestic refining, including for export purposes to markets in Europe.

All of this east-west oriented trade puts the country on more solid footing and makes us less dependent on the U.S.   It gives us far more bargaining chips in trade negotiations.  

So, you think a gazzillion dollar high speed rail line (for passengers only) is good for the economy???

You think building a high speed passenger rail between toronto and quebec city  will unify the country??

You think a high speed passenger train will help east west oriented trade??

Lastly, the way the train route is proposed will not make the trip between toronto and montreal any quicker, let alone toronto to quebec city.

Anyway, it is all pie in the sky, as it has been since first announcement back in 1984 LOL

[Zeitgeist]

23 minutes ago, ExFlyer said:

So, you think a gazzillion dollar high speed rail line (for passengers only) is good for the economy???

You think building a high speed passenger rail between toronto and quebec city  will unify the country??

You think a high speed passenger train will help east west oriented trade??

Lastly, the way the train route is proposed will not make the trip between toronto and montreal any quicker, let alone toronto to quebec city.

Anyway, it is all pie in the sky, as it has been since first announcement back in 1984 LOL

Well the Toronto through Peterborough route rather than along the lakeshore creates a passenger-only route where it’s easier to create track allowing for high speeds and freeing of the freight lines to the south.  It also means that Ottawa is on the line instead of Kingston.  Really the critical HSR is Toronto-Ottawa-Montreal.  Everything else can be expanded over time.   If I knew I could hop on a train after work on a Friday and be in my hotel room in Montreal by 9pm, I would start thinking about investing in Quebec and really embracing the culture there.  I could see Quebecers doing the same in Ontario.  It helps end the Two Solitude regionalism problem for Canada, which sometimes feels like a bunch of countries loosely connected.  The CPR made Confederation possible because the railway made it possible to settle the West. The Trans-Canada Highway and St. Lawrence Seaway have played similar roles for nation building.

Right now I tend to go to Cleveland or Pittsburgh for weekend getaways and Trader Joe’s runs, mainly because I know Ottawa is a 5 hour drive I don’t want to do for just a weekend.  Montreal is even farther.  In fact, I often choose New York City over Montreal because I figure, if I’m going to make a big drive for a long weekend, what’s another 90 minutes on top of the 6 hour drive to Montreal if I can go to a bigger city with more options.

A 3 hour train ride to Montreal changes everything.  It gives Canadians more Canadian travel options. It only works if we do it right and go for a truly high speed option.  If it’s 4 or more hours Toronto to Montreal, that won’t inspire much change in behaviour.  

Edited March 8, 2025 by Zeitgeist

[Army Guy]

On 3/7/2025 at 4:44 PM, TreeBeard said:

why are the polls back in the Lib’s favour?

Look everyone of the experts say the election is coming very soon....If the liberals are in the front of the polls good for them. we will see, come after the election who will govern the country or not....I hope the Liberals lose for personal reasons, I'm also hoping that Alberta does not to leave the union as smith has said....., which will give the US an opportunity to pick them up...which is a huge red flag as we are not as united as we think we are....and once that happens what do you think the future holds for the rest of the country....

[ExFlyer]

21 hours ago, Zeitgeist said:

Well the Toronto through Peterborough route rather than along the lakeshore creates a passenger-only route where it’s easier to create track allowing for high speeds and freeing of the freight lines to the south. ....

  If I knew I could hop on a train after work on a Friday and be in my hotel room in Montreal by 9pm, I would start thinking about investing in Quebec and really embracing the culture there. ....

. The Trans-Canada Highway and St. Lawrence Seaway have played similar roles for nation building.

Right now I tend to go to Cleveland or Pittsburgh for weekend getaways and Trader Joe’s runs, mainly because I know Ottawa is a 5 hour drive I don’t want to do for just a weekend. ....

A 3 hour train ride to Montreal changes everything.  It gives Canadians more Canadian travel options. It only works if we do it right and go for a truly high speed option.  If it’s 4 or more hours Toronto to Montreal, that won’t inspire much change in behaviour.  

Still all about GTA to Montreal.

Our trains cannot be on time now, constantly late or delayed or cancelled going slowly and you think they can go 300kph and be on time?? In the snow? Ice? Rain? Level crossings?

And be electric? 

It will never be just a 3 hour TO to Montreal run if stopping in Peterborough ( ?) and Ottawa.

Lets be realistic and stop this discussion...it will never ever happen.

 

[Zeitgeist]

19 minutes ago, ExFlyer said:

Still all about GTA to Montreal.

Our trains cannot be on time now, constantly late or delayed or cancelled going slowly and you think they can go 300kph and be on time?? In the snow? Ice? Rain? Level crossings?

And be electric? 

It will never be just a 3 hour TO to Montreal run if stopping in Peterborough ( ?) and Ottawa.

Lets be realistic and stop this discussion...it will never ever happen.

 

Well if it doesn’t happen it won’t be because the technology doesn’t exist or we can’t afford it.  It will be because of a failure to dream big, which would be indicative of a much bigger problem that illustrates the inability to walk and chew gum at the same time.

In the great days of Canada’s Centennial we were building Expo 67 and subway lines, we had completed the St. Lawrence Seaway, planning was underway for the Confederation Bridge to PEI, TD Centre had been built in Toronto, and Montreal was bidding for the Olympics. John Lennon and Pierre Trudeau were hanging out and Canada was accepting draft dodgers from the Vietnam War.

Canada can be and should be formidable in its aspirations.  Otherwise why even bother doing the Canada thing?

Edited March 9, 2025 by Zeitgeist

[Dougie93]

On 3/8/2025 at 9:10 AM, Zeitgeist said:

All of this east-west oriented trade puts the country on more solid footing and makes us less dependent on the U.S.   It gives us far more bargaining chips in trade negotiations.  

except in classic Canadian fashion, it's just a lot of talk,

despite Canadian rhetoric about an "existential threat",

there isn't any significant action,

perhaps when the 82nd Airborne Division drops on Ottawa . . .

[Dougie93]

On 3/8/2025 at 12:27 AM, Zeitgeist said:

Then you don’t appreciate how Canada was formed.  The success of Canada was always about the union of the Canadas, English and French.  The ideal was always a completely mixed bicultural Canada.  There’s a special relationship between Quebec and Ontario.  It was all New France going back to the Jesuit missionaries at Ste. Marie Among the Hurons.

yet even during this sudden onset of reactionary Anti-Americanism dressed up as patriotism,

nobody in Canada is invoking any of that,

it is not that Confederation which the populace is rising to defend,

rather they are simply clinging desperately to the postmodern Neoliberal Globalist order,

Samuel de Champlain ?  Most Canadians now have never heard of him

[Zeitgeist]

42 minutes ago, Dougie93 said:

yet even during this sudden onset of reactionary Anti-Americanism dressed up as patriotism,

nobody in Canada is invoking any of that,

it is not that Confederation which the populace is rising to defend,

rather they are simply clinging desperately to the postmodern Neoliberal Globalist order,

Samuel de Champlain ?  Most Canadians now have never heard of him

Well that’s the real conversation that has to happen.  I’m not convinced yet that Trudeau was better at defending that Canada than the Americans calling attention to our unwillingness to defend and stand up for what makes Canada significant.  Our Liberal government handcuffed the country with regulations, international obligations, inquiries and all form of shaming the country for its settler colonial past.

We are reaping what our government has sown.  Trump is doing what he can get away with by taking advantage of our current weakness and kicking the Democrats in the teeth by going after their proxy allies in the Liberal government of Canada.  Carney will I’m sure bring his own flair to the party, but really the country has to smarten up fast.  I simply don’t see that happening under the Liberal government.  Although, Carney is a Davos darling.  He’ll have his shot at fixing the mess.  

[Dougie93]

9 minutes ago, Zeitgeist said:

We are reaping what our government has sown. 

as a Loyalist & Royalist, I am of course not bound to the government nor the public therein,

none the less, Washington has now invoked an existential threat to the British Crown in North America,

thus my Colonel-in-Chief ; Elizabeth Windsor ; summons me to a war footing, even from beyond the grave,

mercenaries for the sovereign. the regiment is our fatherland,

stand by for the forlorn hope,

[CdnFox]

10 hours ago, Zeitgeist said:

Well if it doesn’t happen it won’t be because the technology doesn’t exist or we can’t afford it.  It will be because of a failure to dream big, which would be indicative of a much bigger problem that illustrates the inability to walk and chew gum at the same time.

In the great days of Canada’s Centennial we were building Expo 67 and subway lines, we had completed the St. Lawrence Seaway, planning was underway for the Confederation Bridge to PEI, TD Centre had been built in Toronto, and Montreal was bidding for the Olympics. John Lennon and Pierre Trudeau were hanging out and Canada was accepting draft dodgers from the Vietnam War.

Canada can be and should be formidable in its aspirations.  Otherwise why even bother doing the Canada thing?

I'm not 100% convinced but either of those two things would be the issue if we didn't move forward. I'm certain the technology exists, and as you have noted we have already been a big dreamers many times in our history that doesn't seem to be holding us back

But in all the other things you mentioned there was a business case. Putting those things in would allow for more commerce, expanded business opportunities etc

I am not 100% convinced that this line would in any way shape or form actually contribute to the economy over time in any way that would justify its costs. 

Time will tell and of course as populations grow perhaps the business case becomes stronger but I just don't see how it would be used enough to justify investing The Fortunes into it that it would take.

[500channelsurfer]

 

Poilievre has now decided to campaign actively against this train. The cost/benefit analysis estimates have become unfavourable. The costs and expropriations have grown too big.

In typical Poilievre fashion, no specific policy alternative is deployed.

Why is there no simple proposal to allow Via (or whatever passenger train provider) to get dedicated normal rail lines along this corridor, that could be run parallel to existing lines? There are a few some that may always prefer to fly for the speed, some that will always have a low maximum ticket price, and some that will prefer to drive unless the train is reliable and reasonably quick (= not slower than driving the car). A normal speed dedicated line for passenger rail is almost as good for connectivity and national unity as the high-speed line. The regular speed line will lose a few riders who require higher speed travel but will gain those who are simply seeking reliability and affordability. I think it would be so obvious that a compromise like this is the path to success.

[ironstone]

The concern is that this project, if completed, will have to be heavily subsidized by taxpayers to stay afloat. And most certainly it is going to go way over budget. Is it even needed or is it simply a Liberal vanity project?

The land expropriation process is going to be heavy handed thanks to Bill C-15 being passed.

"

And Bill C-15 has just rewritten the rules, declaring the project “for the general advantage of Canada,” securing federal jurisdiction and bypassing standard processes under the Canada Transportation Act. It streamlines the Impact Assessment Act and, most significantly, amends the federal Expropriation Act specifically for ALTO.

If the Minister of Transport determines land is required, the Crown is automatically deemed to need it for a “public work.” There is no mandatory prior negotiation. Landowners receive abbreviated notice and a short 30-day window to file written objections, with no public hearings and many longstanding appeal rights stripped away or diluted.

Farmers whose fields are bisected, drainage systems destroyed, and operations fractured will face a process that treats private property as an inconvenience to industry, rather than a right."

https://www.rebelnews.com/latest_law_allows_liberals_to_clear_private_property_for_their_high_speed_rail_monstrosity

Depending on the route that's chosen, I'm one of those that could have a big chunk of my property expropriated which of course will significantly drive down property values in this area.

7:00-10:00 , the downsides of this rail proposal.

 

[eyeball]

1 hour ago, ironstone said:

The concern is that this project, if completed, will have to be heavily subsidized by taxpayers to stay afloat. And most certainly it is going to go way over budget. Is it even needed or is it simply a Liberal vanity project?

Isn't it to address a right wing grievance that we still don't have one and China does?

[Nationalist]

Canastan couldn't build this train if their lives depended on it. Its now a country of Dweebs and Muslim overlords.

The country is a joke.

[ironstone]

10 hours ago, eyeball said:

Isn't it to address a right wing grievance that we still don't have one and China does?

If it's built, odds are that it will have to be financially propped up like Via Rail currently is because they aren't profitable.

[Goddess]

15 hours ago, 500channelsurfer said:

Poilievre has now decided to campaign actively against this train.

Blanchet is against it too.  But you won't hear that on CBC, only Poilievre's view.

 

 

[Goddess]

17 minutes ago, ironstone said:

If it's built, odds are that it will have to be financially propped up like Via Rail currently is because they aren't profitable.

This isn't a "nation building" project.  It's a vanity project that will service only a small amount of people.  It's to curry votes in ON and Quebec before the by-elections.

90% of these projects go WAAAAAAY over budget.  Look at California, look at Spain.

Canada has too many real problems that need $100 billion.  We could eliminate poverty and stop 25% of the population of starving, with a fraction of that money.  Build energy projects, which is what Carney campaigned on.

When we get back on our feet economically, then ya - high speed rail would be great.

[ironstone]

What Canada could do with the $90B it's blowing on high-speed rail

It would be about the same price to build a second Canada on top of the first

onservative Leader Pierre Poilievre said that if he ever became prime minister, he would scrap the Alto rail project, a $90-billion program announced in the final days of Justin Trudeau’s premiership that proposed to build high-speed rail between Toronto and Quebec City.
Article content
Article content
Poilievre’s main stated objection to the project is that it will require extensive expropriations of private property across Ontario and Quebec. “The Carney Liberals will confiscate farmland and private property,” he told a press conference at a rural location in Peterborough, Ont., this week.

But expropriations aside, $90 billion is a jaw-dropping sum of money for Canada to spend on anything, much less a project whose chief promise is that it would be about twice as fast as the existing VIA Rail service.  
Article content
Given that Canada has roughly 22 million people who are net tax contributors, Alto would represent a starting cost of at least $4,000 per Canadian taxpayer.

https://archive.ph/u23Wf#selection-3923.0-3937.156

[CDN1]

No one wants to ride public transit in a low trust society overrun with third worlders, coddled street criminals, and feral mentally ill tweakers.

Liberals just want to see some poor suckers shoved in front of that f'n train.

Edited April 2 by CDN1

[ironstone]

3 minutes ago, Goddess said:

This isn't a "nation building" project.  It's a vanity project that will service only a small amount of people.  It's to curry votes in ON and Quebec before the by-elections.

90% of these projects go WAAAAAAY over budget.  Look at California, look at Spain.

Canada has too many real problems that need $100 billion.  We could eliminate poverty and stop 25% of the population of starving, with a fraction of that money.  Build energy projects, which is what Carney campaigned on.

When we get back on our feet economically, then ya - high speed rail would be great.

Needless to say, it was unnerving to get this in the mail earlier in the week. My property backs right up to the Trans Canada Trail which is apparently may be considered as part of the possible route where I live. 

The 401 is supposedly the slightly favored route at this time but I question the need for this project in the first place.

 

[Goddess]

12 minutes ago, ironstone said:

Needless to say, it was unnerving to get this in the mail earlier in the week. My property backs right up to the Trans Canada Trail which is apparently may be considered as part of the possible route where I live. 

The 401 is supposedly the slightly favored route at this time but I question the need for this project in the first place.

 

That's crappy.

I'm sorry.

[eyeball]

1 hour ago, ironstone said:

If it's built, odds are that it will have to be financially propped up like Via Rail currently is because they aren't profitable.

China's high speed rail system isn't either. Imagine how hard you'd be whining if it was.

That said as Chinese commuters make more use of HSR their conventional system is able to move more freight which is profitable.

We should hire China to run our rail systems. Like we should've gotten Norway to manage our oil and gas and Cuba to run our healthcare system.

We suck at doing stuff.

 

[CdnFox]

3 minutes ago, eyeball said:

China's high speed rail system isn't either. Imagine how hard you'd be whining if it was.

That said as Chinese commuters make more use of HSR their conventional system is able to move more freight which is profitable.

We should hire China to run our rail systems. Like we should've gotten Norway to manage our oil and gas and Cuba to run our healthcare system.

We suck at doing stuff.

 

Ok Lyle   

 

 

[eyeball]

3 minutes ago, CdnFox said:

Ok Lyle

I've certainly got no use for the stupid thing.

Meanwhile it's entirely accurate to point out how often you people have admired China's HSR for the same basic reason Trudeau admired China's ability to get things done.

You're jealous.

[ironstone]

43 minutes ago, eyeball said:

China's high speed rail system isn't either. Imagine how hard you'd be whining if it was.

That said as Chinese commuters make more use of HSR their conventional system is able to move more freight which is profitable.

We should hire China to run our rail systems. Like we should've gotten Norway to manage our oil and gas and Cuba to run our healthcare system.

We suck at doing stuff.

 

Maybe it's actually the Liberals that suck at doing stuff. I concede that they excel at winning elections though.

More pipelines would be huge moneymakers while this project is most likely going to be a huge financial drain.

What Canada could do with the $90B it's blowing on high-speed rail

It would be about the same price to build a second Canada on top of the first

Solve Canada’s electricity deficit

Since at least the 1960s, Canada has boasted some of the cheapest and most abundant electricity on earth. But over just the last few years, Canada has become a net importer of electricity. Canadian electricity exports used to power entire U.S. states. But now, for the first time, it’s Canada that needs U.S. electricity to keep the lights on.

Deliver all that LNG the world is clamouring for

Whenever a foreign leader or diplomat is asked what they most desire from Canada, the usual answer these days is “liquefied natural gas.”

It could triple our Pacific oil exports

https://archive.ph/u23Wf#selection-4683.0-4683.39