A Quebec agricultural organization has released a new study questioning the projected cost of Canada’s proposed high-speed rail project between Quebec City and Toronto, arguing that upgrading existing railway infrastructure could provide a less expensive alternative.
The study, conducted by Vision Transport in collaboration with the Union des producteurs agricoles (UPA), suggests that modernizing existing railway tracks could deliver faster passenger services at a fraction of the cost of the proposed high-speed rail network being developed by Crown corporation Alto. However, the alternative would not offer the same travel speeds as a dedicated high-speed system.
The research was conducted by Vincent Duguay, a master’s student at the École nationale d’administration publique, and Pierre DuSablon, an experienced rail industry specialist.
It examines two possible services: one maintaining the 22 stations currently served by VIA Rail and another express service connecting only major cities.
According to the study, the upgraded railway could reduce travel time between Quebec City and Toronto to approximately six hours and 40 minutes for the service stopping at intermediate stations. An express service could complete the journey in about five hours and 50 minutes.
By comparison, Alto’s proposed high-speed rail system aims to connect the two cities in approximately four hours and 30 minutes. The current VIA Rail journey takes about eight hours and 40 minutes.
The alternative proposal includes five major improvements. These involve adding double tracks along 407 kilometres of the existing railway corridor, upgrading signalling systems, giving passenger trains greater priority over freight services, improving level-crossing safety and introducing tilting trains capable of travelling faster around curves.
The study estimates that the initial modernization work would cost between $9 billion and $9.4 billion. With a 20 per cent contingency allowance, the projected amount would rise to approximately $11 billion.
Additional investments could increase the cost to about $21 billion if one-third of the railway’s level crossings were replaced with overpasses. Electrification could require another $3 billion to $7 billion, bringing the overall estimated cost to approximately $30 billion.
UPA president Martin Caron said farmers were concerned about losing agricultural land to a project whose final cost remains uncertain.
He argued that modernizing existing railway infrastructure could reduce the need for land expropriation and limit disruptions to farming communities.
The agricultural organization has repeatedly raised concerns about the proposed high-speed rail route, particularly the potential impact on farmland, drainage systems, access roads and farm operations.
Meanwhile, Alto maintains that a dedicated high-speed railway is necessary to meet future transportation needs along the busy Quebec City-Windsor corridor. The corporation argues that a conventional high-frequency service would not provide comparable travel-time reductions or sufficiently encourage people to switch from cars and airplanes to rail transportation.
The debate comes as Canada’s Parliamentary Budget Officer estimates that construction of Alto’s proposed high-speed rail network could cost between $75 billion and $113 billion, higher than the government’s initial estimate of $60 billion to $90 billion.
The latest study adds to growing calls from agricultural organizations for Ottawa to independently examine alternative transportation options before proceeding with major construction decisions.
As discussions continue, the central question remains whether Canada should pursue a dedicated high-speed railway or modernize existing infrastructure to deliver improved passenger services at a potentially lower cost and with fewer disruptions to agricultural communities.
Swifteradio.com
