Evidence of meeting #23 for Transport, Infrastructure and Communities in the 40th Parliament, 2nd Session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was study.
A recording is available from Parliament.
4:10 p.m.
Bloc
Mario Laframboise Bloc Argenteuil—Papineau—Mirabel, QC
Mr. Gravelle, you have been involved in other studies on high-speed rail. Is that correct?
4:10 p.m.
Project Advisor, Capital Programs, Strategy, VIA Rail Canada Inc.
Yes. I either participated in or collaborated on all of the studies.
4:10 p.m.
Bloc
Mario Laframboise Bloc Argenteuil—Papineau—Mirabel, QC
The key point for Transport Canada officials is the 1995 study, or so they told us. The study is slated to be updated and calls for tenders have gone out from the Quebec, Ontario and federal governments. It seems that the route alignments proposed at the time will be retained. Certainly you must have followed the evolution of the new call for tender process.
Are we really talking about updating the 1995 study? Do you think there is anything else involved here?
4:10 p.m.
Project Advisor, Capital Programs, Strategy, VIA Rail Canada Inc.
The point here is to update the parameters on which previous studies were based. I also think there will be some major changes. The door is being opened to gradual improvements. This approach hadn't necessarily been considered before. Improving or enhancing the reference framework seems like a very interesting approach to me.
4:10 p.m.
Bloc
Mario Laframboise Bloc Argenteuil—Papineau—Mirabel, QC
You talked about a gradual approach. What exactly do you mean by that?
4:10 p.m.
Project Advisor, Capital Programs, Strategy, VIA Rail Canada Inc.
For instance, we could consider having high-speed trains run on certain tracks and slower trains on others, as is the case in other countries. It would all depend on market requirements and the means available to us over time. A somewhat similar approach has been adopted in France, Italy, Germany and elsewhere.
4:10 p.m.
Bloc
Mario Laframboise Bloc Argenteuil—Papineau—Mirabel, QC
Have you travelled to other world countries to study this issue?
4:10 p.m.
Project Advisor, Capital Programs, Strategy, VIA Rail Canada Inc.
I most certainly have. I have been interested in high-speed rail for 30 years and I've been a railway engineer for 50 years. So yes, I've had numerous opportunities.
4:10 p.m.
Bloc
Mario Laframboise Bloc Argenteuil—Papineau—Mirabel, QC
Ms. Watts mentioned earlier that the population living along the corridor is increasing. However, do you feel that Canada is currently in a position to take on the cost of a high-speed rail service? Do you think new studies are needed to answer that question?
4:10 p.m.
Project Advisor, Capital Programs, Strategy, VIA Rail Canada Inc.
New studies are interesting to the extent that they can shed new light on certain project features. The fact remains, however, that the necessary funding must be secured. In the case of high-speed rail, it is the basic infrastructure, not the rolling stock, that is the most costly component of the system. It means a major undertaking over a short period of time. In my opinion, if the study now under way produces findings similar to the ones issued over the years, then maybe the time is right to go forward with this initiative.
4:10 p.m.
Bloc
Mario Laframboise Bloc Argenteuil—Papineau—Mirabel, QC
Ms. Watts, your last study was done in 2004. Do you agree with Mr. Gravelle's contention that the most costly aspect of the project would be investing in the corridor but that once this problem had been resolved, the rest of the project would go smoothly? Have you noted any improvements in that regard? According to your study, the financing of the Calgary-Edmonton rail corridor would be spread over 30 years, which seems reasonable to me.
4:15 p.m.
Associate, Van Horne Institute
Since the study was done, there really has been no investment in the corridor whatsoever. I'm speaking of Edmonton to Calgary, and that's all I can really refer to.
The only work that has been done as a result of our recommendations has been this investment-grade ridership study. The CP Rail corridor remains, obviously, in operation by CP Rail. The fortunate thing about that corridor is it's pretty much straight as a die. It's not as circuitous as the Quebec-Windsor corridor. But it was built in 1891, and basically they just created two ditches and took the material and put it on top. So it definitely is, like the corridor that was mentioned, I think, in the Alexandria subdivision, one that will require investment if it's to serve high-speed rail.
As far as a greenfield corridor is concerned, to my knowledge there has been no acquisition of a corridor. Of course there has been development since even 2004 within the corridor. It's a very fast-growing corridor. And, clearly, any time you would go forward with a high-speed rail study, if the decision were to create a new corridor for it, you would have to re-look at where that corridor could go so as not to go through subdivisions that have been built in the interim periods.
So, no, there has been no capital investment, to my knowledge, and certainly not from government, in the Calgary-Edmonton corridor.
4:15 p.m.
Bloc
Mario Laframboise Bloc Argenteuil—Papineau—Mirabel, QC
Do you still maintain that approximately 70% of the fit-up costs would be recovered over a period of 30 years?
4:15 p.m.
Associate, Van Horne Institute
Well, certainly our study was a pre-feasibility study. We made every effort to be very conservative, because it did not take the level of engineering or estimation--
4:15 p.m.
An hon. member
Hear, hear!
4:15 p.m.
Voices
Oh, oh!
4:15 p.m.
Voices
Oh, oh!
4:15 p.m.
Associate, Van Horne Institute
Or fortunate, in this case, very fortunate.
As a consequence, there has been an escalation of costs. On the other hand, I think we see some improvement in terms of how construction costs have increased in the interim period, but we made certain recommendations in terms of looking for areas of cost savings, with more detail to ensure those costs were robust, before anyone committed to a project and signed on the bottom line.
Given the information at the time, with the CP Rail option we saw full cost recovery plus a surplus of $700 million, with 73% of costs being recovered over 30 years, again, based on the estimate of ridership and also the cost configuration. I would say that some of those assumptions would need to be revisited, obviously, if someone decided to sign a cheque today, which I'm very happy to take back to the west with me.
4:15 p.m.
NDP
Olivia Chow NDP Trinity—Spadina, ON
Assuming that we eventually have a government that has the determination, the courage, and the political will to go ahead with high-speed rail, describe a scenario to me. Let's take the Quebec City-Windsor corridor, and just take a piece of it, let's say from Toronto to Ottawa to Montreal. How would it work in terms of the intermodal cooperation? With VIA Rail, you have 30 years of experience, 4.6 million passengers, and the expertise.
I'm trying to picture what it would be like in Union Station, if someone could park there, take a bus there, or get off the subway. Would it be on the same track as VIA Rail, or would it be two separate tracks? How would it work if VIA Rail has complete control and/or the cooperation so that it would work seamlessly?
I'm just trying to picture it, because, as you know, the City of Toronto is renovating or revitalizing Union Station. I would imagine the design, if there were high-speed rail, would connect. Are we talking about different tracks or the same track? How would it work?
4:15 p.m.
President and Chief Executive Officer, VIA Rail Canada Inc.
Ms. Chow, the first comment I need to make is that this is very important, and once again, when we talk about high-speed trains that travel in excess of 300 kilometres per hour, they do travel on dedicated and exclusive right-of-way.
4:15 p.m.
President and Chief Executive Officer, VIA Rail Canada Inc.
That's the first thing.
However, one needs to keep in mind this other notion--and you touched on it--that this is the spine, or the backbone, of a much larger network that connects to it. I'm not sure what the routing will be when the decision is made, let's say hypothetically, between Quebec City and Windsor. I'm not sure what that routing will be, but the concept.... That's the way it is. I know a bit about the French network and that's exactly what they've done. They've developed a high-speed network and now they're in the process, and well advanced in it, of modernizing the regional network. That network connects.
Let use the example of Kingston. East of Kingston, in the direction of Coteau and Cornwall, let's say, assuming the routing of the high-speed train would go Montreal-Ottawa, Ottawa-Toronto, people ask what is going to happen with Coteau, with Cornwall, and with other communities. I believe the mayor of Kingston was in front of your committee. I read his comments and his valid concerns. But until the routing is defined, I think we need not to draw quick assumptions. The network would feed off other modes or other types of rail services that are more conventional. It could be buses. It could be the highway system.
In the case of Toronto, as you say, we have ongoing discussions with the City of Toronto on the development of that station. GO Transit is involved in these discussions. The city knows that these studies are going on because the Government of Ontario is involved.
Our vision is that whatever or whoever operates it--if it ever gets decided to operate it--our vision is that we will try to make the point that these systems must connect with each other and complement each other, be they conventional rail, high-speed rail, bus, highways--
