VIA Rail News

[UrbanWaterloo]

VIA Rail News
http://www.viarail.ca/en

http://smartcanucks.ca/wp-content/uploads/2006/04/via-rail-logo.gif

[Spokes]

Via examines options to improve Kitchener-Toronto commute
August 2, 2008 | Brian Caldwell | The Record | Link (http://news.therecord.com/News/Local/article/393496)


WATERLOO REGION - Via Rail is planning "significant improvements" to the line that runs through Kitchener and Guelph, giving commuters hope of a more efficient alternative to clogged highways.

Malcolm Andrews, a spokesperson for the Crown corporation, cautioned that negotiations are continuing and only preliminary engineering work is being done on the line between Toronto and London.

But he said an announcement on firm plans is expected by the end of the year, with work to begin in 2009. "At this point, a number of options are being looked at," Andrews said.

Included are upgrades to tracks, sidings, signal systems and other infrastructure to reduce trip times and accommodate more trains.

Via currently runs three trains a day each way between Toronto and Kitchener, including a morning commuter service.

Paul Langan, a regional spokesperson for advocacy group Transport 2000, called it "great news" that improvements are likely to go ahead.

"Our line is finally going to join the modern age with faster trains."

He is still frustrated, however, by the slow pace of progress and that rail service isn't given a much higher priority in overall transportation plans.

Money for work on the Toronto-London line will come from $692 million committed by the federal government last fall for the busy Quebec City-Windsor corridor.

Most of the funding, $516 million allocated over five years, is earmarked to refurbish trains, infrastructure and stations.

Andrews said plans for the Toronto-London line are complicated by negotiations with the owner of the tracks, Goderich-Exeter Railway.

"It's not headline news yet," he said. "We're not quite there."

[Spokes]

VIA Rail plans to add 6 afternoon trains on the North Mainline by 2011
By shost at 10:07 pm on Wednesday, July 22, 2009

GO published their final Environmental Assessment documents this week and within was some interesting information about VIA Rail’s planned improvements. After some heavy reading, the following was published in Appendix B:

VIA Rail plans to add six new trains to the North Mainline, London to Toronto via Kitchener and Guelph. Trains departing from London at 1155, 1505, 1755, and departing from Toronto at 1300, 1630, 1830. This plan would provide off-peak service during the afternoons, and seems to avoid GO “Rush Hour”.

Very interesting news, as if this comes to pass we stand to have 12 VIA Rail and 8 GO Transit departures and arrivals per day by 2011, more than double today’s passenger rail service.

http://gokw.org/?p=141

[DHLawrence]

I've said it before: This is why we can't have nice things!


Better train service delayed by fee dispute with U.S. company (News/Local/article/698516)
April 15, 2010
BY TERRY PENDER, RECORD STAFF
KITCHENER — Improved passenger train service along the London-Stratford-Kitchener-Toronto line is now delayed because of a dispute over how much VIA Rail should pay an American-owned company for increased use of the tracks.

The rail line between London and an area near Georgetown is leased and operated by the Goderich-Exeter Railway Co. Ltd., and has been for about 10 years. Goderich-Exeter (GEXR) is owned by RailAmerica, and has a lease on the line until 2018.

Years ago, in an effort to cut costs, CN Rail leased out many stretches of track to what are called short-line operators.

VIA Rail says it wants to make improvements to the track so an increased number of passenger trains can travel at higher speeds along that stretch of line. VIA Rail also wants to install equipment that allows for the tracking of trains from a single office — or Central Train Control.

For about the past year VIA and Goderich-Exeter have been in negotiations. The talks centred on the payments VIA makes for the use of the track.

Now, VIA has asked the Canada Transport Agency to arbitrate. The Canada Transport Agency is an independent federal organization that oversees federally regulated modes of transportation.

Catherine Kaloutsky, a VIA spokesperson, said the London-Kitchener-Toronto line is very important to VIA.

“Because it is important we are taking steps to improve the infrastructure that will allow us to grow the business,” Kaloutsky said.

“We want to move forward. We have indicated to GEXR we want to move forward as quickly as possible.”

Not so fast, says RailAmerica.

Peter Touesnard, a regional vice-president for RailAmerica, said the infrastructure improvements VIA wants will have to be maintained by RailAmerica in the future and that means increased maintenance and operating costs for the short-line operator.

“We have struggled to come to terms with VIA about what it would take to maintain that infrastructure going forward,” Touesnard said.

RailAmerica would have to hire three additional people to maintain signals for the Central Train Control system, and at least two more to keep the track better maintained, Touesnard said.

“As we increase the speed of trains our due diligence for track maintenance goes up.”

RailAmerica had always wanted to negotiate the issues with VIA rather than go before the Canada Transport Agency, a move that could take months before a decision is handed down.

“We think this is unfortunate,” Touesnard said. “We think this is something we should be able to sort out commercially.”

Paul Langan, a Hespeler resident who has lobbied for better passenger service for 20 years, said enough is enough.

The federal and provincial governments should buyout RailAmerica’s lease, take control of the line and significantly increase the frequency of passenger rail service.

“It’s the real solution,” Langan said. “It makes no sense to be at the mercy of these foreign owned freight railroads.

“We can’t have more trains because the governments won’t fight to get control of our railways.”

tpender@therecord.com

It's amazing that the tracks through Kitchener are still dark. Why wasn't CTC installed sixty years ago when there was traffic on the line?

[IEFBR14]

Paul Langan, a Hespeler resident who has lobbied for better passenger service for 20 years, said enough is enough. The federal and provincial governments should buyout RailAmerica’s lease, take control of the line and significantly increase the frequency of passenger rail service.
The feds should give CN and RailAmerica a few months to come up with a viable solution. (Viable for everyone, including consumers.) If they can't reach an agreement then expropriate and lease the entire route to someone who can. This is one of those bits of basic infrastructure that needs to be in place for the public good, rather than a football that's kicked back and forth between two companies with conflicting interests.

[Spokes]

Paul Langan, a Hespeler resident who has lobbied for better passenger service for 20 years, said enough is enough.

The federal and provincial governments should buyout RailAmerica’s lease, take control of the line and significantly increase the frequency of passenger rail service.

This guy's right. It's too much of a hastle to be leasing from a foreign owned company as is, now factor in this. If the government is serious about getting people out of their cars, have them step up and show it.

[DHLawrence]

The nationality of the owners doesn't make a difference; if CP ran the line, they'd be just as difficult. CN is the only railway in North America that bends over backwards for passenger trains, and that's a legacy of their Crown Corporation status--they did what the government told them to. Even after VIA was split off from CN, they were still expected to be very generous to VIA when it came to operations. That's one of the reasons why the Canadian actually runs on the route of the Super Continental; CP couldn't be told what to do by Transport Canada.

[mpd618]

The nationality of the owners doesn't make a difference; if CP ran the line, they'd be just as difficult.

This. To state the obvious: passenger travel by outside companies is not a priority for freight railways. (And passenger rail on its own hasn't made sense to private railways since the dawn of highway subsidies.)

[Duke-of-Waterloo]

“It’s the real solution,” Langan said. “It makes no sense to be at the mercy of these foreign owned freight railroads.

Looks like the Highway 407 of railroads!

[DHLawrence]

It's like that in the US as well. Problem is, somebody needs to own the tracks because somebody has to be responsible for maintenance. Having a third party organization own the tracks wouldn't work; they did that in the UK ten years ago and it was a total disaster that they're still trying to recover from in the rail sector.

The government does need to get involved in this, even if it means providing subsidies to GEXR and/or CN to get more traffic slots for VIA trains. People complain about the government wasting money on something that should be competing rather than being subsidized without realizing that bus and trucking companies are being subsidized the world over.

[IEFBR14]

The Hwy 407 debacle exists for a different reason. It was built with public funds on public lands and, at first, seemed to be a success. But then Mike Harris ran into fundiing challenges in implementing his Common Sense Revolution. He decided, not just for ideological reasons but also for cynical short term political reasons ("burning furniture to heat the home"), to lease the highway to private interests.

It's clear that he settled for way too low a price. But he also allowed the buyer to negotiate a draconian (for vehicle drivers) contract with provision for turning the province into a debt collection agency of the Hwy407 owners.

This isn't a failure of public enterprise or even of public-private partnerships. Rather, it's a failure of political leadership. It's an abject demonstration of what desperate politicians will do in order to get themselves re-elected, the public be damned.

[metropolis]

There is a reason companies operated by government are typically bloated, expensive to the end user (as a result of both tax subsidies and more expensive in terms of end user pricing; LCBO anyone?). Making the system public is not the answer.

Rather than comparing European rail where the systems in most Scandinavian countries has been privatized vs. ones in say Italy, Spain, Greece have not (and look at the financial troubles those countries are in partially as a result of their various subsidised programs that should be private!) lets use a more local example: The TTC as a government run transit institution vs. Viva (in York Region) just North of Toronto as a privately run one with some government oversight.

The TTC has millions more riders but is dated, does not stretch efficiently to many areas of the city and is now at the mercy of politicians who want to look fiscally responsible all of a sudden and are now cutting all sorts of LRT funding they had promised. Whereas Viva runs in a very suburban region about the size of Toronto but where ridership is low yet the buses are modern, run on time and offer lower fares (imagine).

York Region did its homework (hiring a French consultancy that does this sort of work), figured out two different operating zones and auctioned them off to two different companies (both foreign; European in fact). This has fostered friendly competition between the companies, which has not only returned all the above benefits to riders but saddled their government with less tax expenditure. The region still sets policy but this system (as any properly overseen private system) is inherently more efficient.

Government taking control is not the answer and never will be. Its scary to me how many people think this is not the case. This may be perhaps an extreme comparison but there is a reason Communism failed. :)

[garthdanlor]

....but this system (as any properly overseen private system) is inherently more efficient.
Except, of course, in the numerous examples where privatization of essential services didn't work. The unfortunate thing for the tax payer is that when the attempt at privatization goes pear-shaped, we get to pick-up the tab for the failure because it is, well, essential that these services continue.


Government taking control is not the answer and never will be. Its scary to me how many people think this is not the case. This may be perhaps an extreme comparison but there is a reason Communism failed. :)
You know what's really scary is people who equate essential government provided public services with totalitarian communistic regimes...get real.

[IEFBR14]

lets use a more local example: The TTC as a government run transit institution vs. Viva (in York Region) just North of Toronto as a privately run one with some government oversight.
Hardly an apples-to-apples comparison.

Apart from its fleet, Viva doesn't have much capital intensive infrastructure. The TTC has to maintain an aging infrastructure that includes decades-old subway tunnels and stations, street car tracks and lines, aging bus fleets, etc.

Viva can hire young people at lower wages with few health care issues and pensions that don't have to be paid for decades into the future. The TTC has to deal with an entrenched union, aging workers whose benefits are more expensive to provide as well as retirees who depend on a pension plan that's underfunded.

In a few decade's time Viva will be facing the same sorts of problems that the TTC does today. But unlike the government owned TTC, when the going gets tough Viva's owners will be able to simply decline to renew their contract and walk away, leaving it to taxpayers to foot the bills.

[mpd618]

The U.S. Postal Service is a counterpoint to any claims about government inefficiency: it runs beautifully. And conversely, privately run monopolies can be quite terrible.

But anyway, why are we talking about operations and whether they are public or private? Here the issue is ownership. If the federal government owned the north mainline, it could prioritize passenger rail and have it be run by either a public or a private firm. The crucial thing now is that the owner of the line has no interest in passenger service, whereas a government owner has the public interest in mind.

[IEFBR14]

Train service needs a boost (http://news.therecord.com/Opinions/Editorials/article/698632)
The Record - April 19, 2010

Canadians have often held a romantic view of their railways. Trains didn’t just pull passengers and freight, they also pulled the country together, bringing the Maritimes and British Columbia — figuratively speaking — closer together.

Regrettably, the same Canadians who admired John A. Macdonald for having the vision to see the day when trains would go across the prairies and through the Rockies have not always bought the tickets needed to keep the trains on the tracks. In the ’50s, ’60s and ’70s, automobiles and planes raced ahead of the trains as the preferred method of travelling between cities.

In the more environmentally conscious 21st century, trains may have a chance to catch up. If Ontarians — and Canadians generally — can design a better overall transportation system, we may require less oil to power vehicles and, consequently, spew out fewer pollutants. Furthermore, if the use of trains increases, the average cost of going from one point to another should be significantly reduced.

The problem, however, is that as of today Ontario doesn’t have such a system, except perhaps in the Toronto area, where subway and GO trains comfortably move people around. For much of the rest of the province, the train service often isn’t good enough to tempt riders to leave their automobiles at home.

Just look at a problem that has arisen in the Georgetown area, between Guelph and Toronto. Goderich-Exeter Railway Co. Ltd. leases the tracks from CN Rail and then rents them to agencies such as VIA Rail.

VIA, an independent Crown corporation, wants to improve the tracks so it can increase the number of trains on the tracks and the speed at which they travel. Those are admirable goals. Ontarians won’t leave their cars at home unless the rail options are better than at present. The problem is that Goderich-Exeter Railway Co. Ltd, which is owned by RailAmerica, has not been able to reach a deal with VIA about the cost of maintaining the new tracks. They would come with a higher price tag.

To be fair, Goderich-Exeter Railway Co. Ltd. cannot be blamed for trying to avoid getting stuck with additional costs without an equivalent increase in revenue. Goderich-Exeter is a private company that is trying to maximize its profits.

In response, VIA has asked the Canada Transport Agency to arbitrate the dispute. Perhaps that request will provide a short-term solution, but this dispute reveals a deeper problem: We don’t really have a solid train policy. It’s a hybrid that, at least in this case, isn’t serving either the public or the private sector very well.

Ontarians who want to support trains will hope VIA and Goderich-Exeter can reach an amicable agreement on their own, and they may also hope that the Ontario government can expand the current GO service in southern Ontario. The province has endorsed the principle of bringing GO trains to Kitchener but so far it has offered no money to implement this policy.

At the very least, the government should say when GO trains will come to Waterloo Region.

[smably]

I've never ridden a GO bus that was anything but sparkling clean, inside and out. Greyhound uses old, filthy, smelly buses, their terminal in Toronto is the most unpleasant facility I've ever used, and they even tried to pull out of downtown Kitchener (http://news.therecord.com/article/347329) for some reason. I'll take the government-run service any day, thank you very much.

If it's a good idea to keep railways in private hands, why not sell off our roads and highways to private companies? Is there really a difference, other than the fact that we're used to privately-owned railways and publicly-owned roads?

(Also, VIVA's fares (http://www.yorkregiontransit.com/fares/index.asp) really aren't any lower than the TTC's (http://www3.ttc.ca/Fares_and_passes/Prices/index.jsp). Does YRT/VIVA get over 70% of its operating revenue from fares, like the TTC does? Not that it's a fair comparison, but I wasn't the one who claimed that YRT/VIVA was more efficient! :p)

[metropolis]

Except, of course, in the numerous examples where privatization of essential services didn't work. The unfortunate thing for the tax payer is that when the attempt at privatization goes pear-shaped, we get to pick-up the tab for the failure because it is, well, essential that these services continue.

You know what's really scary is people who equate essential government provided public services with totalitarian communistic regimes...get real.

For ever example where privatization has gone pear shaped (mainly the UK) there are as many where it works beautifully like throughout Scandinavian Europe and France. Lucky for us there are plenty of these successful systems to study and implement over the failed ones.

What's scariest of all are people who have their head so far up their ass they fail to realize we are living with a system where public transit has and continues to fail us miserably and are too afraid of bold ideas to realize it... or to realize the fact that the Communism statement was clearly written to lighten the seriousness of the previous post.

[metropolis]

Hardly an apples-to-apples comparison.

Apart from its fleet, Viva doesn't have much capital intensive infrastructure. The TTC has to maintain an aging infrastructure that includes decades-old subway tunnels and stations, street car tracks and lines, aging bus fleets, etc.

Viva can hire young people at lower wages with few health care issues and pensions that don't have to be paid for decades into the future. The TTC has to deal with an entrenched union, aging workers whose benefits are more expensive to provide as well as retirees who depend on a pension plan that's underfunded.

In a few decade's time Viva will be facing the same sorts of problems that the TTC does today. But unlike the government owned TTC, when the going gets tough Viva's owners will be able to simply decline to renew their contract and walk away, leaving it to taxpayers to foot the bills.


So what better way to affect the power of the those unions than to auction off the system piecemeal to private companies who could be nimble enough to negotiate realistic union contracts so they aren't burdened with unrealistic legacy costs.

Besides, when a conductor who has been on the job two years and earns $60,000 per year and who's salary eventually tops out well in excess of $100,000 has nothing to do with legacy cost or aged infrastructure. That is called stupidity. That's the TTC.

No private firm looking to stay competitive would agree to pay those wages for that position when most College grads don't earn that 2 years out. This is what happens when you have a government that is rightfully too afraid of pissing off too many constituents negotiating with unions. Those same unions would have considerably less power to negotiate these sorts of ludicrous contracts with private institutions where the government could act as mediator instead.

Aged infrastructure issues can be reduced if the system is divided among many transit management firms all of whom would look to one-up their competitor across town. That is the secret to the success of private transit in places like Stockholm. As I mentioned in my original post all the successful systems still need government oversight and subsidies. So why not, based on a pre-established set of criteria give the more successful companies in this multi company transit system more of the subsidy money and have them take on more of the system from the failing firms as time passes?

This could easily be applied to city transit as well as multi track inter-city transit.

[mpd618]

Whatever the difference in cost between good and bad union contracts, it is nowhere near as large as the difference in cost between good and bad transit. We have continued to heavily subsidize our roads and have been very meagre with transit infrastructure and transit operations spending. Private versus public operation is a fine thing to discuss, but it is not a solution to that fundamental problem of public funding priorities.

Private can work well, public can work well. Both can be terrible. But without magic funding sources involved, the differences between the two styles of operation are simply not game changing.

[IEFBR14]

So what better way to affect the power of the those unions than to auction off the system piecemeal to private companies who could be nimble enough to negotiate realistic union contracts so they aren't burdened with unrealistic legacy costs.Perhaps you should take a look at what's in those contracts. Assuming they allow for contracting out (see e.g. the last couple of Toronto garbage strike) the cost of "severance" would be astronomical. Moreover, just because some private companies use these sorts of sleight-of-hand techniques to break unions, clear out aging workers because they've become too expensive, etc. doesn't mean that such practices are moral. But that's another debate altogether...

[garthdanlor]

For ever example where privatization has gone pear shaped (mainly the UK) there are as many where it works beautifully like throughout Scandinavian Europe and France. Lucky for us there are plenty of these successful systems to study and implement over the failed ones.
What's scariest of all are people who have their head so far up their ass they fail to realize we are living with a system where public transit has and continues to fail us miserably and are too afraid of bold ideas to realize it... or to realize the fact that the Communism statement was clearly written to lighten the seriousness of the previous post.
Along with the successes, there have been spectacular failures of privatization in transportation & infrastructure, energy, prisons, etc, world wide including Canada. If, as you suggest, privately run companies are "inherently more efficient", why then these failures? The reality is, of course, that both private and public can be implemented and run well or poorly. My preference is for well funded and run public transportation systems. But, you are correct, bold steps have to be taken to realize this.

As for the "communism" thing, I simply don't find that comparison funny or remotely correct. Similar and incessant comparisons from the Tea Party Right are probably to blame for this...

[garthdanlor]

I've never ridden a GO bus that was anything but sparkling clean, inside and out. Greyhound uses old, filthy, smelly buses, their terminal in Toronto is the most unpleasant facility I've ever used, and they even tried to pull out of downtown Kitchener (http://news.therecord.com/article/347329) for some reason. I'll take the government-run service any day, thank you very much.
I regularly ride Greyhound between Kitchener & Toronto and couldn't agree more. The buses are foul and and the station is completely inadequate for the volume of passengers and buses that go through it. Not only that, the spot where KWCG passengers line-up is dangerous as we are constantly having to dodge incoming buses. I'd love to see a new terminal over by Union Station, but we are running short of land in that area...

Much better experiences with GO.



If it's a good idea to keep railways in private hands, why not sell off our roads and highways to private companies? Is there really a difference, other than the fact that we're used to privately-owned railways and publicly-owned roads?

They would if they could get away with it politically.

[Spokes]

I've never ridden a GO bus that was anything but sparkling clean, inside and out. Greyhound uses old, filthy, smelly buses, their terminal in Toronto is the most unpleasant facility I've ever used, and they even tried to pull out of downtown Kitchener (http://news.therecord.com/article/347329) for some reason. I'll take the government-run service any day, thank you very much.

Definitely! The station is so sketchy. It's dark. You have to cross the street from where you arive to where you depart. And it's not maintained at all.

[metropolis]

Whatever the difference in cost between good and bad union contracts, it is nowhere near as large as the difference in cost between good and bad transit. We have continued to heavily subsidize our roads and have been very meagre with transit infrastructure and transit operations spending. Private versus public operation is a fine thing to discuss, but it is not a solution to that fundamental problem of public funding priorities.

Private can work well, public can work well. Both can be terrible. But without magic funding sources involved, the differences between the two styles of operation are simply not game changing.

Agreed. Our road infrustructure gets a considerably larger piece of the funding pie than it should (Take last year's 401 work in the many places where it was less than needed). We are unlikely to ever break the cycle of expanding highway networks as a result of increasing traffic unless our governments step away from their current model of transportation funding. I suppose this is beginning to happen but the steps are trivial and symbolic for now.

[metropolis]

They would if they could get away with it politically.

Road pricing is in the works through Toronto's Metrolinx and its a hot topic in the runup to this Fall's Municipal elections in Toronto as well. Transit has higher operating costs than roads do mainly because the cars rolling over the highway are owned and maintained by the end users whereas the cars rolling over track are not. No need to auction off the roads they will just toll them. It's already happening in many large cities throughout the world.

[metropolis]

As for the "communism" thing, I simply don't find that comparison funny or remotely correct. Similar and incessant comparisons from the Tea Party Right are probably to blame for this...

Agreed on the Tea Party comments... my favourite was the lady standing outside of the Senate prior to the health care vote saying to the camera, "You know this is just the beginning don't you? Next they're coming after our gun laws, you know that don't you?" That made me laugh for days.

[garthdanlor]

Road pricing is in the works through Toronto's Metrolinx and its a hot topic in the runup to this Fall's Municipal elections in Toronto as well. Transit has higher operating costs than roads do mainly because the cars rolling over the highway are owned and maintained by the end users whereas the cars rolling over track are not. No need to auction off the roads they will just toll them. It's already happening in many large cities throughout the world.

Tolls and road ownership are a slightly different topic, but I would like to see moderate road tolls used to fund maintenance of existing roads and the expansion of transit in Toronto and elsewhere.

[metropolis]

Perhaps you should take a look at what's in those contracts. Assuming they allow for contracting out (see e.g. the last couple of Toronto garbage strike) the cost of "severance" would be astronomical. Moreover, just because some private companies use these sorts of sleight-of-hand techniques to break unions, clear out aging workers because they've become too expensive, etc. doesn't mean that such practices are moral. But that's another debate altogether...

I have obviously not looked at the contracts in detail but travel the world with the job I have (its not glamerous, trust me), which gives me the chance to travel many of the world's cities and when I visit places like Stockholm or even Vancouver it makes me really upset as an end user of transit in those regions and ours realizing how inferior the service we have here is.

Contrary to what I am proposing may indicate I am pretty left leaning in my political views and though I agree it may be somewhat immoral to break the living standards of unionized families who have learned to rely on a certain lifestyle, I also believe that the good of the greater population should be preserved and when the financial burden of these union contracts begin to affect that greater population it should be the needs of the many that take precedent. In my humble opinion anyway.

[garthdanlor]

Agreed on the Tea Party comments... my favourite was the lady standing outside of the Senate prior to the health care vote saying to the camera, "You know this is just the beginning don't you? Next they're coming after our gun laws, you know that don't you?" That made me laugh for days.
Yeah, it is laughable but also scary due to the influence they have over Republican policy. Who knows what will happen if these people start winning seats in the Senate or House as a third party.

[jay]

Railway fee dispute frustrates politicos all down the line


April 27, 2010
BY TERRY PENDER, RECORD STAFF
KITCHENER —

A fee dispute between VIA and the Goderich Exeter Railway is “extremely frustrating” for people who have long waited for increased passenger train service to Toronto, Mayor Carl Zehr says.

“We have communicated verbally and in writing to both parties to come to an agreement,” Zehr, who is heading up a coalition of mayors along the rail line, said.

VIA and GO both want to increase passenger train service between here and Toronto. But everything is on hold, and has been for some time, because VIA and the Goderich Exeter Railway cannot come to an agreement about the fees VIA would have to pay for increased use of the track.

Zehr said the dispute is frustrating, in part, because politicians can do little to move the process along other than urge VIA and the Goderich Exeter Railway to resolve their differences.

“Regrettably our hands are tied on it,” he said.

VIA has asked the Canada Transport Agency, a federal regulator, to arbitrate the issues.

The Goderich Exeter Railway is owned by Texas-based RailAmerica. That company leased the line from CN. The Goderich Exeter Railway controls the line along the London-St Marys-Stratford-Kitchener-Guelph corridor to a siding near Georgetown.

Until the lease expires in 2018, both VIA and GO must first come to an agreement with the Goderich Exeter Railway about the fees to be paid for increased use of the track before service can be improved.

GO has completed an environmental assessment that contemplates up to 20 passenger trains a day to Toronto. GO is currently waiting for the provincial government to provide the funds for the service, which it aims to start in the spring of 2011 with a smaller number of trains.

VIA will not say how many more passenger trains it will add to the line other than to say it wants to increase the level of service.

“You should be able to get on a train every hour on the hour and get into Toronto in less than an hour,” Coun. John Gazzola, a vocal supporter of better passenger train service, said.

But none of this will happen unless the railways resolve the fee dispute.

Kitchener-Centre MP Stephen Woodworth said the federal members of parliament along that stretch of rail line are closely following the issue but also feel frustrated.

Woodworth said the federal government provided VIA with about $500 million in 2007 to help pay for improvements to the track, but so far VIA has been unable to spend the funds because of the dispute with the Goderich Exeter Railway.

“As much as we would like to go down there and beat people about the head and tell them to be reasonable, it is not in our jurisdiction to do so,” he said.

“The MPs are concerned and hoping the two parties can work it out,” Woodworth added. “If they couldn’t then it is time to start thinking about legislative solutions, but that is premature at this point.”

Thousands of vehicles clog the 401 every day for commutes that could be faster, easier and less expensive if rail service was improved along the London-Kitchener-Toronto corridor—the so-called North Line.

“It is the best way of moving masses of people and getting them out of cars and off expensive infrastructure, i.e. roads,” Zehr said.

“We share that concern, no doubt about it,” Rajan Philips, the manager of transportation planning for the City of Guelph, said.

“We have been concerned both at a technical level and a community level,” he said.

Without the technical improvements to the rail line increased passenger service is unlikely. Also, the City of Guelph is about to expand its downtown railway station and that is based on better passenger train service along the corridor.

The rise of the short-line railway industry is rooted in the 1996 Canada Transportation Act. That legislation allows railways to lease out or sell unprofitable lines.

CN has leased out or sold 4,772 kilometres of track since 1996 and abandoned another 3,248 kilometres of track, company spokesperson Jim Feeny, said.

Since that time CN has also bought back some lines in B.C., northern Alberta and Eastern Canada.

“From CN’s perspective it has allowed us the flexibility to manage our assets,” Feeny said. “The federal government did not want to shackle railways to unprofitable lines, but it didn’t want railways to walk away from the lines either.”

By focusing all their attention and resources on shorter hauls the short-line operators are able to earn profits on lines that ran with red ink for CN, he said.

[IEFBR14]

If we were trains we would have crashed at 08:39am :D

Here's a relevant letter to the editor: CN Rail never abandoned line (http://news.therecord.com/printArticle/703277)
W. Dean Trentowsky’s letter to the editor talks of Rail America (Goderich-Exeter Railway) “saving” the rail line that runs through Guelph and Kitchener (commonly called the North Main Line) from abandonment in the 1990s. Trentowsky stated CN Rail was going to abandon it. I would like to point out a few facts.

CN Rail never put the line up for abandonment. It was never on their list of proposed lines to be abandoned. CN Rail still owns the line 20 years after Trentowsky suggested CN was going to abandon it. Any other thoughts on this matter are simply conjecture.

The federal government has invested money in VIA Rail to improve rail safety and infrastructure on the North Main Line to be able to increase passenger rail trains from the current six a day.

According to GO Transit’s environmental assessment report for Guelph, VIA Rail and GO Rail want to schedule 20 passenger trains a day to travel through Kitchener and Guelph to London and Toronto.

The only reason we do not have 20 passenger trains on this line is that Rail America is preventing this from happening.

It is a fact that the Canadian Transportation Agency ruled against Rail America in its application against VIA Rail under Sections 112 and 138 of the Canada Transportation Act, (Decision No. 101-R-2009, dated, March 19, 2009).

It is time to move forward.

Paul Langan

Cambridge

[Urbanomicon]

If we were trains we would have crashed at 08:39am :D

Crash averted. :)

[IEFBR14]

Petition wants federal minister to resolve rail dispute (http://news.therecord.com/printArticle/707051)
Any resolution to a dispute that derailed improved passenger train service between Kitchener and Toronto is many months away, says a spokesperson for the federal agency that will rule on the disagreement between Via Rail and the Goderich-Exeter Railway Co.

“The process is underway now,” Mark Comeau, spokesperson for the Canadian Transportation Agency, said. “We are not talking years here, but we are certainly talking months anyway.”

VIA wants to add more passenger trains on what is called the North Main Line, which runs from Georgetown to Guelph, Kitchener, Stratford, St. Marys and London. The Goderich-Exeter Railway leases that stretch of line from CN and has control of it until 2018.

The dispute centres on how much money VIA must pay Goderich-Exeter for increased use of the track. After years of negotiations, VIA applied for what’s called formal adjudication under the Canadian Transportation Agency.

VIA wants to make improvements to the track and change how trains are controlled. These changes will add to the operating costs for Goderich-Exeter.

“We will arrive at a determination that party X must pay so much to party Y for the use of the line,” Comeau said. “Once a decision is made it is binding on the parties for five years.”

VIA applied for adjudication of the issues under a clause in federal legislation — the Canada Transportation Act — that allows passenger carriers in disputes with freight haulers a faster way to get the Canadian Transportation Agency involved.

It will not be fast enough for Friends of the North Main Line, a group of citizens who want the issues resolved between VIA and Goderich-Exeter so more passenger trains can start rolling.

That group started an online petition Monday night and in less than 24 hours, more than 56 people added their names to it.

The petition is addressed to John Baird, the federal minister of Transport, Infrastructure and Communities, and asks him to resolve the dispute between the railways so passenger rail service can be improved along the line that serves a population of a million people.

“Basically we want to take it to the next level,” Paul Langan, spokesperson for Friends of the North Main Line, said. “I am totally confident that we will easily get 500 or 1,000 names.”

Highways and streets are expanded all the time, but better passenger train service is a different story, Langan said.

“We are hoping that’s the answer, to raise the profile of the issue,” he said. “I mean how do you get a government to respond to hold a government agency accountable?”

VIA is a federal agency but so far, the federal government has not waded into the dispute between VIA and the Goderich-Exeter Railway Co.

On March 18, the mayors of London, St. Marys, Stratford, Kitchener, Waterloo, Guelph, Halton Hills and Waterloo Region all signed a letter that was sent to Baird.

“There is a substantial need for increased inter-regional rail service to support employment opportunities, tourism (including the Stratford Festival) and other business and personal passenger travel between our communities and the GTA (Greater Toronto Area),” said the letter.

“Currently the congested Highway 401 is the only means of access to the economic hub located in Toronto,” the letter said.

Baird has not responded so far.

The petition site is here: VIA Rail vs Goderich Exeter Railway: Resolution Petition (http://www.petitiononline.com/via2010/petition.html)

[plangan107]

There has been excellent articles in the Record but they do not publish websites. Here are the websites related to this issue.
Please sign the petition VIA Rail wants to move this money to somewhere instead of spending in on the North Main Line because of the hassle with Goderich Exeter.
Petition - http://www.petitiononline.com/via2010/petition.html (http://www.petitiononline.com/via2010/petition.html)
Press Release - http://www.wireservice.ca/index.php?name=News&file=article&sid=2494
Friends of the North Main Rail Line Website - http://moretrains.weebly.com (http://moretrains.weebly.com)

Paul Langan

[Spokes]

Welcome to Wonderful Waterloo Paul!!

Im glad the process is underway, but it's a real shame it'll take so long. It'd be nice for a decision to be made soon so that they can move forward with much needed improvements.

[plangan107]

Thanks, great forum, Here is the latest in the saga of VIA Rail verus Goderich Exeter from the Guelph Mercury http://news.guelphmercury.com/News/article/630172 (http://news.guelphmercury.com/News/article/630172) . VIA Rail's statement in this article about "committed to making the improvements on the line" is so far a sham. They have not spent a dime on rebuilding the rail diesel cars to run on the line nor have they started any improvements. Please sign the petition.

[DHLawrence]

Where are the RDCs for the North Mainline being stored? I only know of two at Mimico and a number of them out east being rebuilt for northern Ontario and Vancouver Island.

[plangan107]

Where are the RDCs for the North Mainline being stored? I only know of two at Mimico and a number of them out east being rebuilt for northern Ontario and Vancouver Island.

Industrial Rail Car in Moncton has about 30 of them. They are the company that refurbishes them. here is a link to a slide show from their website showing the RDCs. http://www.industrialrail.ca/services.php#rrdcu

[UrbanWaterloo]

An unbelievable discount for an unforgettable trip.
http://www.viarail.ca/en/sale?WT.mc_id=_bulad_60p_2010prom_lnk_BuyNow_en_10 0714

http://www.viarail.ca/sites/all/files/media/images/landing-pages/2010/sale60/255x255_60pourcents.jpg

Make the most of everything Canada has to offer. Travel by train in comfort to anywhere VIA Rail goes by October 31, 2010 inclusive and save 60%. But hurry – this offer ends July 19, 2010.

To receive the 60% discount, you must book in one of the following booking classes: For travel in Economy class, choose “Economy – supersaver fare.”

Example: Return Kitchener To Montreal | Total $141.02 (Regular $352.56)

[UrbanWaterloo]

Update: VIA Rail Train Accident in Burlington, Ontario
Reports of numerous passenger injuries – Three crew fatalities
26 February 2012 | Via Rail | Link (http://www.viarail.ca/en/about-via-rail/media-room/latest-news/1772/26-february-2012-update-via-rail-train-accident-in-burlington-ontario)

Montreal – VIA Rail Canada train number 92, en route from Niagara Falls to Toronto, was involved in an accident at approximately 3:30pm local time today. The incident occurred in the Aldershot, Ontario area.

There were 75 passengers on board the train at the time of the accident. There are reports of several injuries to passengers and three fatalities, all VIA crew members who were in the locomotive at the time of the accident.

There were one locomotive and five cars on the train, all of which derailed. Emergency services were on the scene shortly after it occurred and are attending to those requiring their assistance.

Three passengers were airlifted to hospital with serious injuries. 42 other passengers and one crew members were also taken to local hospitals.

All other passengers have been removed from the train and are either en route to Toronto or will be shortly.

The cause of the accident is not known at this time. VIA will collaborate fully with the Transportation Safety Board of Canada, which is investigating.

Anyone seeking information about passengers who may have been on this train may call a special number set up for this purpose, at 1-888-842-6141.

Other VIA trains will be affected due to the tracks being blocked at the scene of the accident. Passengers travelling in southwestern Ontario later today can check on the status of their train at 1-888-VIA-RAIL (888-842-7245) or at viarail.ca.

Further details will be provided as they are known.