• tunetardis
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    9
    ·
    9 months ago

    Much of that involves building dedicated rail so that passenger trains don’t get stuck behind freight trains. Indeed, it looks like Via is going to do that — at least on the Windsor–Quebec City corridor, where 96 per cent of Via trips take place.

    I think this is the key? I can’t help but think Via is forever fighting the battle with one hand tied behind its back. In theory, if it’s not going to be a high speed service, it should at least be price-competitive with intercity buses as rail is a more efficient form of transport. But bus companies don’t have to lease the roads from companies that can raise the rates the minute they start to show a profit, or prioritize freight on those roads. If they owned their own lines, they could legit start offering reliable, high-speed service.

    • corsicanguppy
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      8
      ·
      9 months ago

      If they owned their own lines, they could legit start offering reliable, high-speed service.

      If we owned the lines, you mean? Then we set the priority, and the maintenance and budget and operating history is all open; and more is spent keeping it running and less on CEO bonuses.

      In which universe is cross-country daytime shipping truly the priority anyway? Only to the shipper’s bottom line.

      We have transportation and highways; why is this ministry not in charge of rail and wires?

      • tunetardis
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        9 months ago

        That’s fair, yeah. To have a truly level playing field between buses and trains, the rail should be a public resource just like the roads.