RC111 MarApr 2024 - Magazine - Page 29
UESTION. WHICH G7 countries do NOT have a high-speed rail line?
If you answered Canada, you are correct. Japan opened the
world’s 昀椀rst high speed rail line between Tokyo and Osaka
in time for the 1964 Olympics. Since then, other members of
this elite group—Italy, France, Great Britain, and Germany
have constructed their own high-speed lines. Meanwhile
here in Canada, we’ve been remarkably good at studying
the feasibility of high-speed rail going as far back as the 1970s but
have yet to build anything, other than the expectation that perhaps
some day faster travel by train will happen.
As for the U.S. they’re in a bit of a grey area. The Amtrak Acela
Express, which operates in the northeast corridor between Boston
and Washington, D.C. has a top speed of 240 km/hour—10 km/hour
short of the internationally recognized baseline of 250 km/hour for
high-speed lines.
Last fall both countries—Canada and the U.S. made major announcements tied to joining the proverbial G7 high speed rail club
in coming years. In October, Minister of Transport Pablo Roderiguez
announced the launch of the Request for Proposals (RFP) for the VIA
High Frequency Rail (HFR) initiative, describing it as the country’s
largest infrastructure project in not just years, but generations. A project involving the creation of mostly electri昀椀ed, dedicated tracks over
Q
of a better railway system sans private partner—to parties convinced
our tax dollars would be better spent elsewhere.
In a recent interview with ReNew Canada, Graeme Hamphshire,
HFR’s Project Director and designated lead on the procurement
process weighed in on some of the challenges and opportunities that
lie ahead.
“There’s a very di昀昀erent view, as you know, towards public transport in North America compared to other parts of the world. And
(while) the railway built Canada… that was a long time ago,” says
Hampshire, who has helped to oversee high speed rail projects in
Europe and the U.S. “We’ve now moved into an environment where
road dominates, and private transport dominates.” An observation
underscored by a recent BBC article on “the surprising truth about
getting the public on board (whether in North America or Europe)
with cutting car use,” which highlights the growing perception from
some right-wing factions that “a war against drivers” is underway.
A viewpoint that belies the fact that for decades here in North
America, funding for highways has taken precedent over railways.
As a consequence, Hampshire observes that in this country “the train
takes ages and even in eastern Canada, if you want to get around… I
think it’s (only) six trains a day between Toronto and Montreal,” over
a distance of about 540 kilometres.
In comparison, the train running a comparable stretch between London to Edinburgh
“runs at least every half an hour, sometimes
more. So, there’s just this culture of using
public transport that we need to encourage
in Canada,” he observes.
As with any major infrastructure project involving billions of
dollars of public financing, Canada’s HFR project has come under
the scrutiny of everyone from concerned citizens to members of
parliament, to the media and special interest groups.
VIA RAIL CANADA
a 1,000-kilometre stretch between Toronto, Ottawa, Montreal, and
Quebec City that could eventually run west to Windsor as well.
This was followed in early December by an announcement by the
Biden administration of over US$8 billion in funding for rail infrastructure, including US$3 billion for the Brightline West high-speed
rail project running from Las Vegas to Los Angeles.
Fundamental di昀昀erences between the two announcements included the fact that the U.S. one was tied to approved funding for a
rail line that could open in time for the 2028 Los Angeles Olympics,
whereas the Canadian one lacked any reference to funding; rather it
was proclaiming a desire to move the project along toward an eventual funding decision by welcoming proposals from the private sector.
Yet another di昀昀erence is that Brightline will boast a top speed of
300 km/hour whereas if Canada’s HFR comes to fruition, current projections are a maximum initial speed of 200 km/hour. In other words,
not a high-speed rail line based on international standards, but one
which as the HFR website shares “will run on mostly dedicated tracks
at higher frequencies, higher speeds and with greater reliability.”
Navigating public response to the HFR line
As with any major infrastructure project involving billions of dollars
of public 昀椀nancing, Canada’s HFR project has come under the scrutiny of everyone from concerned citizens to members of parliament, to
the media and special interest groups. And viewpoints ranging from
those convinced it’s high time this country began to catch up to other
advanced economies when it comes to public transit—to supporters
RENEWCANADA.NET
The road/rail tug of war
Aaron Wudrick with the national think tank
Macdonald-Laurier Institute says he “would
love a world where you don’t have to own a
car (but) we need to separate what we’d like
the world to be like from what the reality is
in places like North America where there is a very strong cultural attachment to not just cars per se… but this idea of freedom and going
anywhere I want quickly.”
Wudrick, who is director of the institute’s domestic program
recently wrote an article for the National Post with the headline “No
Canada Doesn’t Need Bullet Trains.” Apart from writing matter-of-factly about Canada’s love for cars, he questioned the positive
environmental impact the HFR will have as part of the country’s
e昀昀orts to reduce its carbon footprint. “Simply put, rail can only really
rack up big emissions reductions if it induces widespread, as opposed
to marginal, changes in aggregate travel behaviour,” he observed.
“Meanwhile, dedicating tens of billions to rail infrastructure would be
misallocating scarce resources away from other projects or initiatives
that could get better emissions-reduction bang for the buck.”
Building on that thought process, Wudrick told ReNew Canada “I
do think there are arguments for improved transit… especially in
large cities… but sometimes I think the discussion should be more
about buses than trains.” Or other municipal transit services such as
Ottawa’s light rail system, which appeals to those who “don’t want to
pollute with a car, pay for gas or worry about safety and tra昀케c jams.”
Further to Wudrick’s observation, the lack of funding for municipal
transit services has become a rallying point for commuters in cities
across the country. So much so that last summer in response to those
concerns, Infrastructure Canada announced plans to invest $3 billion
per year towards upgrading services. However, that funding won’t
commence until 2026-27.
MARCH/APRIL 2024 – RENEW CANADA 29
