Thank you, Mr. Chair.
We're very pleased to be here. Thank you for the invitation. I'll make my remarks very brief to maximize the time available for the committee's questions.
At CN we are strong supporters of passenger rail operations in Canada as well as in the U.S. Here in Canada, about 77% of all passenger train miles are operated on CN's network. VIA Rail Canada, GO Transit in Toronto, and Agence métropolitaine de transport in Montreal are our three largest passenger train customers. There are others as well, such as the Rocky Mountaineer and our own operation on the former Algoma Central.
Safe service, efficient service, and reliable service are the keys for this business. For the first 10 months of this year, our on-time performance for our three largest customers has averaged about 92%. It's a little bit less for VIA Rail, and it's a little better than that for our commuter customers in Toronto and Montreal.
Another example of CN support for passenger rail in Canada is our strong relationship with VIA, with which we are working on upgrades to CN infrastructure to support additional train starts and improve schedule reliability in the Toronto-Montreal-Ottawa corridors.
I understand that your current study concerns high-speed passenger rail operations, which are an exciting reality in Europe and Asia and are currently receiving significant support in the U.S. This committee, the government, and Parliament as a whole will have a central role in determining whether or not Canada embarks on a true high-speed rail initiative.
It's an important and timely public policy decision involving significant costs but also significant benefits. Your decision will become a key element of long-term transportation policy in Canada.
Frankly, I do not envy you the task of balancing the mobility, energy efficiency, and environmental benefits of rail transportation with the competing investment needs that you must all deal with. But if I may, please allow me to summarize what CN feels are some of the key attributes of a safe and efficient high-speed rail passenger implementation.
First, we feel that it should operate on a dedicated and fenced right-of-way, without operations co-mingled between passenger and freight. There should be no public crossings at grade on that right-of-way, either public or private.
It should provide for electrified operation and electric locomotives. It should be protected, from a train control and safety point of view, with a positive train control type of system.
It should afford gentle gradients and curvature in order to obtain the types of speeds that the modern equipment can make. It should be efficiently linked to other transportation systems, particularly regional and urban public transportation systems.
I know that your committee has heard about the option that's generally termed “higher-speed” rail. This would be an incremental approach that would see passenger trains running marginally faster than today, still co-mingled with freight operations.
While I am not here on behalf of CN to say no to anything, this is not an option that CN would recommend. A maximum passenger train speed in excess of the current maximum of 100 miles per hour on existing heavy freight corridors is fraught with difficulties: in maintaining the track to the close tolerances required for passenger operations under those speeds, due to the heavy loads imposed by freight trains; in balancing the super-elevation of the curves required for the mix of both fast and slow trains; and in protecting against road and rail conflicts at crossings at grade and against the possibility of trespass. I would note that on our line, our Kingston subdivision between Toronto and Montreal, we have 246 public and 203 private crossings at grade.
Finally, in terms of maintaining schedule reliability as capacity consumption increases due to the increased difference in train speeds, which causes more frequent overtakes of slower trains, I note that in most territories outside the northeast corridor in the U.S., Amtrak, the passenger train operator there, is limited to 79 miles per hour, versus our current maximum here in Canada of 100 miles per hour between Toronto and Montreal. While maximum speeds for Amtrak are much higher in the northeast corridor—and again, I know your committee has studied this—there are very few freight trains operating in that territory, except on the short segments serving the Baltimore area. As well, the northeast corridor is completely grade-separated.
To summarize, CN believes that the best approach for high-speed passenger rail operations is on a dedicated right of way such as we see in Europe and Japan. However, we are willing to work with all participants on any option that affects our network or right of way. Our concerns with operating on a non-dedicated basis and co-mingling freight and passenger operations at higher speed include safety--and we would certainly want to have the rail safety group from Transport Canada at the table in any sort of discussion--passenger schedule reliability, and protection of our ability to move our customers or freight in an efficient manner.
Mr. Chair, I'll end there. I look forward to the committee's questions.
