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.
4:35 p.m.
Project Advisor, Capital Programs, Strategy, VIA Rail Canada Inc.
I couldn't tell you. It all depends on what the systems actually are. I can tell you that the bulk of the money goes into the infrastructure, but it all depends on exactly the layouts and the actual level of service that is envisaged.
4:35 p.m.
President and Chief Executive Officer, VIA Rail Canada Inc.
One key criterion, obviously, as you know, is the length of the line. When we describe that, it's Quebec-Windsor. That's been traditional. It's like a brand. Quebec-Windsor has become a brand, but is it really going to be that?
4:35 p.m.
President and Chief Executive Officer, VIA Rail Canada Inc.
We don't know that. I don't want to presume that it will be shorter or longer, not to get anybody upset or the mayors excited. We'll have to wait and see. Then there are routing and expropriation costs, if any, to go back to Mr. Volpe's earlier question.
4:35 p.m.
Liberal
Martha Hall Findlay Liberal Willowdale, ON
I guess we'll find out, but it would have been more apples-to-apples in comparing the study that was done in 1995, the kilometrage, etc.
Can I just clarify something? In the 1995 study and the 200-kilometre approach versus the 300-kilometre approach, not that $2 billion is different, but I think one was around $16 billion and the other was around $18 billion. Is the new study looking at both of those again as well, or is it...?
4:35 p.m.
President and Chief Executive Officer, VIA Rail Canada Inc.
I couldn't answer that specifically. I don't really know what they're looking at right now specifically.
4:35 p.m.
Liberal
Martha Hall Findlay Liberal Willowdale, ON
Ms. Watts, do we have some ballpark idea of the cost for Calgary-Edmonton?
4:35 p.m.
Associate, Van Horne Institute
Yes, but it is a 2004 figure, I will say that, and it is a pre-feasibility study. There was quite a high contingency built into those numbers, particularly for the new greenfield option. The range was $1.7 billion for the CPR option, which is the existing corridor, and I think the high was $3.4 billion for the electrified greenfield option.
4:35 p.m.
Liberal
Martha Hall Findlay Liberal Willowdale, ON
Right. My apologies. You actually did say that in your beginning--
4:35 p.m.
Bloc
Mario Laframboise Bloc Argenteuil—Papineau—Mirabel, QC
I have a question for Mr. Côté. The Canadian Bus Association has told us that this initiative would pose something of a problem for them, unless a public-private partnership can be forged. If that were possible, they would be interested in taking part, along with their parent company that specializes among things in rail transportation in Europe, in a call for tenders for a public-private partnership to develop a high-speed rail corridor.
Are you concerned at all about this, or is VIA prepared to enter into a public-private partnership, if its charter could be amended? There were plans once to amend VIA's charter, but nothing ever came of it.
4:35 p.m.
President and Chief Executive Officer, VIA Rail Canada Inc.
I have been working in this field since 1972 and I've never been afraid to take up a challenge. I'm scheduled to retire at the end of the year. Throughout my years of working for CN and VIA Rail passenger services, I've had to face some enormous challenges. If governments give the go-ahead to high-speed rail and if it means that VIA Rail and others must demonstrate their ability to be worthwhile partners, then I can assure you that VIA Rail workers have the skills, expertise and motivation to get the job done. If it is given the opportunity to come on board, VIA Rail will be able to use its expertise, qualities and long-standing experience.
I have been the President and CEO of VIA Rail for six years. Everywhere I go, people congratulate me and VIA Rail for doing a good job with the current rail network. I can't say what the government will decide to do, but if ever it is given the opportunity, VIA Rail could certainly be a key player and would be prepared to face the competition.
4:40 p.m.
Conservative
Candice Bergen Conservative Portage—Lisgar, MB
Thank you very much, Mr. Chair.
Thank you to the witnesses. I really have enjoyed the information, specifically the information, Ms. Watts, that you're bringing forward. I think it's important because it's concrete.
Can you tell me why, in your opinion, Calgary and Edmonton do not go ahead and build this?
4:40 p.m.
Associate, Van Horne Institute
I know for a fact that the Alberta government was very interested in the project. They have gone forward with the next step, which was our recommendation, to get more robust figures around ridership to assure them and inure themselves from the risk. I think it will obviously require a large expenditure of money, and there are many demands on the public purse. I can't speak for why they didn't go forward with it, but I know that the premier at various times has expressed his support for it.
I think the important thing and the interesting thing about the high-speed rail is that it would fundamentally change that corridor. It would change it from being a corridor with two centres, which at one time were competing, into being a complement of one million people, effectively shrinking the distance because of that link, to a unit of three million people. I think that it has to be linked to a broader vision of economic development. It's not simply a transportation solution, but a provincial shaper of that corridor, which has been such a juggernaut of growth over the last decade.
4:40 p.m.
Conservative
Candice Bergen Conservative Portage—Lisgar, MB
Did your study also take into account whether people would access this mode of travel if they were able to have access to good transportation within the city? I'm talking about making sure that within cities there's transportation. Would that affect the ridership?
4:40 p.m.
Associate, Van Horne Institute
It definitely does affect the ridership.
We recommended two things. First was that the stations be located in proximity to the downtown stations and the LRT, and, second, in the outer facilities, our market surveys indicated the need for parking, and we incorporated that into the study and costing.
4:40 p.m.
Conservative
Candice Bergen Conservative Portage—Lisgar, MB
Okay.
Also, did it take into account--and we've talked about this a lot over the last few weeks--our weather and the fact that the standards aren't set on what kind of rail we would need to withstand the weather in Canada? Obviously there's a lot of research and development still that perhaps has to go forward. Did your study take that into account?
4:40 p.m.
Associate, Van Horne Institute
In two ways--sort of a yes and a no--it did. First of all, obviously there are areas in Switzerland and so on that have snow as we do. I think the engineers felt that the design standards being applied would not be a problem. Having said that, we did not do a study of the technologies in terms of weather, etc. We did, however, acknowledge that one of the demand-side aspects of the high-speed rail is that when there's bad weather and Highway 2 closes between Edmonton and Calgary, this would offer a viable alternative to very dangerous driving conditions at those times. Those were the plus and minus sides of that question.
4:40 p.m.
Conservative
Candice Bergen Conservative Portage—Lisgar, MB
I guess the jury's still out on the standards. We have been told that we would have to set new standards. I would be very appreciative of getting that information so that we would know what's required.
4:40 p.m.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Merv Tweed
With that, I'll thank our guests for being here today. We appreciate your input.
We will take a brief one-minute recess while our new witnesses come forward, and then we'll continue.
4:45 p.m.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Merv Tweed
Thank you. Welcome back. We appreciate our guests' patience.
I'd like to now introduce Guy Baruchel and Kevin Fitzgerald, with Thales, and Toby Lennox, vice-president for the Greater Toronto Airports Authority.
I understand that you know the rules, so I would ask you to present, and then we'll get to questions.
4:45 p.m.
Guy Baruchel President, Thales Canada Inc.
Merci, monsieur le président.
As President of Thales Canada, I welcome the opportunity to appear before the committee today to speak on the issue of high-speed rail in Canada and more specifically on what we would be able to provide in the way of high-speed train control systems.
I will be sharing my time with Kevin Fitzgerald, our vice-president of business development within the rail signalling division of our company in Toronto. I will start first with a few words about our company.
Thales is a world leader for electronic systems, serving the fields of defence, aerospace, and security with world-leading and dual-use technologies. Similarly, in Canada, Thales Canada is organized into three business lines: one for defence, based in Ottawa and Montreal; one for avionics, based in Montreal; and one for rail signalling, based in Toronto. We employ 1,350 people and our sales last year were over $400 million Canadian.
As a worldwide company, Thales Group's sales last year exceeded $18 billion, and we employed 68,000 people in more than 50 countries. Out of this number, 22,000 people and 19% of the revenues were directed to R and D. This R and D capacity and focus were exactly what led our company to establish our facility in Toronto in the seventies, when the province decided to encourage the development of modern urban transit systems.
Today, I am proud to say that our Toronto operation is a world leader in rail signalling and an international centre of excellence for our group, the Thales Group. From Toronto, we are providing our customers worldwide with turnkey solutions that increase performance and capacity while reducing operating, maintenance, and infrastructure costs.
In Canada, our systems are in service in Vancouver for the SkyTrain line and the Canada line, and in Toronto for the Scarborough rapid transit line. As an exporter from Canada, we have delivered major projects in Hong Kong, Shanghai, Beijing, London, Kuala Lumpur, Seoul, and New York City, and we are now developing a system for Paris, just to mention some of them.
On the issue of high-speed rail, Thales has been a world leader through its European units and its systems are currently in use on lines in France, Spain, Greece, Germany, Finland, Turkey, Algeria and Mexico.
The construction of a high-speed railway system in Canada would have a very significant industrial impact for Thales Canada. The Thales Group has as a policy to ensure, when we have such a major project, the transfer of technology and knowledge from other business groups worldwide into a division—and in this case, into our division in Toronto—to provide the Canadian customer with a solution that will be not only the best solution the group can offer, but, most importantly, a Canadian solution.
I would like now to give the floor to Kevin, who will give you more technical information about our technology.