[Bordercollie]

Thanks for mentioning the last federal election (less than four months ago!), where the leading party was confirmed in power by a vote share which is indistinguishable from the federal share (42.6% vs. 43.8%), whereas the separist party received marginally less votes than the parties ending nationally as official opposition and Rank 4 combined (27.7% vs. 27.8%)!

It truly takes a remarkable degree of numerical analphabetism to interpret these figures as a strong desire for separatism and a high degree of polarization against federal politics. I wish I could say the same about Alberta, but that‘s thankfully even more irrelevant for this thread than already this discussion is…

I think polls need to be taken with a grain of salt.

Look at what happened to PP. He was leading by a landslide but once people got tired of the axe the tax, Trudeau is the problem to everything and Carney was nominated literally everything changed overnight. He even lost his own seat that he held onto for 20 years and he might even loose the bi-election.

Considering what's going on down south, I would say leaving Canada now would be foolish for any province. You would have to renegotiate National and international trade. That could disrupt their economy for ten years or more.

I don't think they would take that kind of risk especially during this unstable time.

 

[lrt's friend]

I think polls need to be taken with a grain of salt.

Look at what happened to PP. He was leading by a landslide but once people got tired of the axe the tax, Trudeau is the problem to everything and Carney was nominated literally everything changed overnight. He even lost his own seat that he held onto for 20 years and he might even loose the bi-election.

Considering what's going on down south, I would say leaving Canada now would be foolish for any province. You would have to renegotiate National and international trade. That could disrupt their economy for ten years or more.

I don't think they would take that kind of risk especially during this unstable time.

Totally agree. At a time when we are about to embark on nation building projects including Alto, why would we consider contrarians in Quebec and Alberta? Canada greatly benefits from standing together. Splintering will just suck us into the Trump chaos even more . As a result, I strongly favour investing millions into serious studies to extend Alto in Southwestern Ontario, and the Calgary-Edmonton corridor. The latter will garner support from Alberta's majority urban population who already support urban rail projects

 

[crs1026]

Considering what's going on down south, I would say leaving Canada now would be foolish for any province. You would have to renegotiate National and international trade. That could disrupt their economy for ten years or more.

I don't think they would take that kind of risk especially during this unstable time.

Agree. I take the separation sentiment seriously - as sentiment - but the timing could not be worse for the separation-minded. Any suggestion that Quebec (or any province) would fare better against the US expansionist efforts as a separate nation than as a part of a united Canada negotiation is utter foolishness. And, while in other times the separation threat might assist a province in extracting concessions for remaining in Canada (and Quebec is already a master at this) - with other provinces likely to take hits in US trade, there will be others demanding equal treatment across provinces with whatever programs or support Ottawa can provide.
Beyond that, interprovincial trade and transportation has always mattered and it matters more now. So better interprovincial infrastructure is a worthwhile and prudent investment. I bet the Caisse is counting on the Ontario portion of the project to prop up the Montreal-Quebec City portion of Alto, which is less likely to ever happen as a provincially-funded standalone.
So, let's not get distracted with all this, the definition of Alto can factor it in but these broader things should not carry undue weight.

- Paul

 

[micheal_can]

This fall is the next QC election. Even if the PQ gets in,it does not mean separation is going to happen. And even if a referendum is held, there is no guarantee of enough wanting it. Besides, we have 5 years before the major construction begins on this line. Lots of time for the separation mess to blow through and settle.

 

[Bordercollie]

This fall is the next QC election. Even if the PQ gets in,it does not mean separation is going to happen. And even if a referendum is held, there is no guarantee of enough wanting it. Besides, we have 5 years before the major construction begins on this line. Lots of time for the separation mess to blow through and settle.

Let's be real. Canada's GDP is 2.2 Trillion dollars. Quebec is only 505 billon. If the Americans step on our nation as a whole as a trading partner what do you think they will think of Quebec?
95 billon worth of trade is a drop in the bucket in terms of America.

Good luck negotiating with them on your own.

Alberta is in an even worse position given that their exports are OIL and Beef.

Let's be real here, Ontario contributes 50% of the nation's GDP. To think that any other province can do it alone unrealistic. If anything it can lead to bankruptcy for any province to do that.

 

[dowlingm]

We appear to be wandering from the thread. Given that the implication of separation would go far beyond Alto, not least to VIA Rail’s HQ in Montreal, perhaps further discussion could land elsewhere?

 

[Urban Sky]

We appear to be wandering from the thread. Given that the implication of separation would go far beyond Alto, not least to VIA Rail’s HQ in Montreal, perhaps further discussion could land elsewhere?

Agreed, let‘s get back on topic: does anyone remember what were we discussing in this thread before it got hijacked?

 

[just east of the creek]

I think you're forgetting this, @crs :

Alto - High Speed Rail (Toronto-Quebec City)

I hope Carney sticks to his word when he said he wanted HSR from QC to Windsor and not just to Union.

urbantoronto.ca

The above post addresses the double-track issue.

I did forget. And thank you. The Don Valley question does remain interesting . Squeezing in ALTO, two tracks for GO, potential storage tracks? Broadening the ability of the Don to cope with floood waters, try and bring back some further naturalization….. all
of this seems to be at odds with the demands for transport. The DVP remains a problem!.

 

[JJTheJetPln]

I'm always excited to see more rail developed, however, I'd also like to see if someone here could come up with a logical map or diagram on how they believe the rail should logically be ran.. I know there are a lot of creative minds here who enjoy doing that.

 

[nfitz]

potential storage tracks?

After the debacle about the cancelled and unnecessary GO storage tracks, I doubt that Alto will try that one.

 

[dowlingm]

After the debacle about the cancelled and unnecessary GO storage tracks, I doubt that Alto will try that one.

If Alto does use the Don Branch then I guess Leaside Yard is a potential storage/servicing site without impinging on the valley. GO didn’t go that route but they didn’t want/need to access the CP north of Leaside and thus take on the cost of bridge rehab.

 

[crs1026]

I did forget. And thank you. The Don Valley question does remain interesting . Squeezing in ALTO, two tracks for GO, potential storage tracks? Broadening the ability of the Don to cope with floood waters, try and bring back some further naturalization….. all
of this seems to be at odds with the demands for transport. The DVP remains a problem!.

The only part where double track is iffy is from the big bridge down to where the line joins the Bala Sub alignment. That's actually only about a mile (from the south end of the bridge). I'm not sure that even that section is a problem, but if it were, one mile of single track so close to Union with speeds already lower on the approach to the Don curve would not be a major bottleneck. And the big bridge is only 1,200 feet long so that further section of single track is not a dealbreaker I wonder if it could be rebuilt as a gantlet track, which would save a few seconds in throwing switches.

- Paul.

 

[nfitz]

If Alto does use the Don Branch then I guess Leaside Yard is a potential storage/servicing site without impinging on the valley. GO didn’t go that route but they didn’t want/need to access the CP north of Leaside and thus take on the cost of bridge rehab.

Is there enough of Leaside yard available with the Ontario Line yard just south of there? The old CP Leaside station was knocked down recently, along with other structures in Metrolinx's way.

If assume they'd end up south the existing VIA yard and facilities at Willowbrook.

If not, there's a lot of space at Agincourt.

 

[crs1026]

If assume they'd end up south the existing VIA yard and facilities and Willowdale.

I would assume they will use the TMC at Mimico. Lots of room even if they want their own dedicated maintenance building.

- Paul

 

[dowlingm]

Is there enough of Leaside yard available with the Ontario Line yard just south of there? The old CP Leaside station was knocked down recently, along with other structures in Metrolinx's way.

If assume they'd end up south the existing VIA yard and facilities and Willowdale.

If not, there's a lot of space at Agincourt.

I mean, CP would have to want to sell obviously, but I pass there a lot and it’s rare to see much parked there. The piece west of Millwood would make sense for the flyunder with yard activities (and noise) more on the east side

As for Agincourt, yes that would also be a possibility but would have 9.3 miles more deadheading too.