Transport committee  My understanding, sir, is yes. Again, I'm not directly involved in this study, but I know that in past studies the estimates have included those sorts of things.

Transport committee  That's correct.

Transport committee  If you diverted the passenger trains off most mainline freight--there are some exceptions for short lines and remote service--it would have very little economic impact. They would improve their volumes over time and probably be able to operate more efficiently because they'd have fewer constraints.

Transport committee  I can't say it's been a factor, but the government has committed to a PPP or a triple P--whatever jargon you want to use--a public-private partnership office. It's in the process of being staffed. The person they've brought in to run it is a very experienced individual. I would expect that if the government decided to move on something like this, that would be the ideal place to manage it, from a public sector interest point of view.

Transport committee  I agree, but that would be the way I would recommend the government look at managing its interest. Obviously there are other interests, the usual safety and other oversight interests, but from the point of view of managing the government's economic and broader interests, that would be my recommendation.

Transport committee  I think there are two ways you could put that question. That's certainly one way. There is another way you could say it. Historically, at least in the last 50 to 70 years in this country—if you go back to the 1900s, you could make a different case—at least since World War II, governments have implicitly or explicitly made the choice to go with air or road, because that's where the government money went.

Transport committee  You could ask the question either way.

Transport committee  I'll give you one example. The CN main line between Montreal and Toronto was running, a year ago--it's less today--when they were operating in a different kind of economy, roughly 85 trains a day, both ways. About a dozen of those trains were VIA trains. They were running roughly 70-plus trains a day.

Transport committee  I would make a few observations here. You're right about deregulation. The ability of government to directly control everything has been reduced, and the marketplace is now much more dominant than it was back in the sixties and seventies. Having said that, one of the things that I think government still has significant influence over is setting the broad conditions within which all of these private sector players play.

Transport committee  I'm going to ask Mr. Langan to answer that question too. I think the short answer, particularly in the two high-speed corridors that are being talked about, is that the studies would justify the investment. Particularly if you compare it as it was earlier to the amount of money we're plowing into highways anyway, it's not a difficult sell.

Transport committee  On the private side of a public-private partnership in high speed, the private side should be responsible for the operation and maintenance of the system and for all things related thereto. I think they could share in the responsibility of the financing of the system. I think the government needs to be responsible for the assembly of the corridor, either directly or indirectly through whatever means it feels is appropriate.

Transport committee  For my sins I was a senior official in the 1980s and early 1990s. All I can tell you is that in the 1990s there was an absolute and complete fixation on slaying the deficit and getting the fiscal house of the country in order. There was just no appetite for any other thing at that point in time.

Transport committee  The answer is yes, if you do it in a multi-year way. It very much depends on how you contract it. If you offer to private contractors a relatively secure contracting environment over a significant period of time, you should be able to exercise significant price leverage.

Transport committee  To some degree, yes, there are. But if you go to high-speed rail, the speeds you're talking about are simply beyond the capability of any technology to provide that kind of warning system. You absolutely must separate the traffic from the general public. You have to have overpasses or some means of securing the rail right of way so that people can't get into it.

Transport committee  There is no technology that would allow you to have a level-grade crossing on a high-speed rail track and be safe. It doesn't exist. No one in the world has come up with that yet. There are lots of ways, and it's quite routine, that you can bury the rail line somewhat, so that the fencing and other things you need are not as intrusive, and make it cheaper to do the overpasses because you don't have to go up as high.