Business
Don’t be fooled by high-speed rail
From the Frontier Centre for Public Policy
Rail advocates admit that trains can’t compete with airliners over long distances or with cars over short distances but claim there is a middle distance – supposedly around 150 to 800 kilometers – in which rail has an advantage over its competitors. That would be true only if the trains were almost 100 percent subsidized.
The Canadian government is considering spending $6 billion to $12 billion to introduce what it calls “high-frequency trains” between Toronto and Quebec City. Though some media reports have described these as high-speed trains (which generally means trains capable of going 250 kilometers per hour), they won’t be. Building such a rail line would easily cost $60 billion and probably much more.
Passenger-train advocates argue that Canada needs to join the international race to have the fastest trains in the world. But this is a race Canada can afford to lose because the country has something that is faster and far less costly: jet airliners.
High-speed trains were already obsolete in 1964, when Japan started operating its first bullet trains. Six years before that, Boeing had introduced the 707 and Douglas the DC-8, both of which cruised four times faster than the early bullet trains and twice as fast as the fastest trains in the world today.
Aside from speed, airliners also have a huge cost advantage because they don’t require a lot of expensive infrastructure between cities. While airports are infrastructure, the only infrastructure airliners really need are paved runways and perhaps a Quonset hut for ticket agents, baggage handling, and a waiting room—which is all that some of Canada’s more remote airports have.
Today’s big-city airports with huge concourses, shops, and jetways were built up over time and mostly paid for out of ticket fees. In contrast, rail advocates want taxpayers to put up tens of billions of dollars before a single wheel turns in the hope that trains that are slower than flying, less convenient than driving, and more expensive than both will somehow attract a significant number of travelers.
Rail advocates admit that trains can’t compete with airliners over long distances or with cars over short distances but claim there is a middle distance – supposedly around 150 to 800 kilometers – in which rail has an advantage over its competitors. That would be true only if the trains were almost 100 percent subsidized.
Air Canada and its competitors currently offer more than three dozen flights a day between Toronto and Montreal with fares starting at $118, less than 25 cents per passenger-kilometer. Fares on VIA Rail Canada averaged 68 cents per passenger-kilometer in 2022, and more than half of its costs are subsidized. People are simply not going to ride high-speed trains in large numbers if those trains cost far more than airlines, buses, or driving.
Amtrak’s only high-speed train, the Acela, collected fares of CN$1.80 per passenger-kilometer in 2022, and while Amtrak claims it covers its operating costs, all of its infrastructure costs are paid for by taxpayers. Amtrak brags that it carries more passengers in the Washington-New York corridor than the airlines, but cars and buses in this corridor carry well over 10 times as many intercity passengers as Amtrak.
The other argument rail advocates make is that high-speed trains will offer shorter downtown-to-downtown times than airlines in some markets. But most people neither work nor live downtown. Toronto and Montreal each have three commercial airports and residents are more likely to be near one of those airports than downtown.
Finally, rail proponents claim that high-speed trains will emit fewer greenhouse gases than cars or planes. But as usual they ignore the construction costs—that is, the billions of kilograms of greenhouse gases that would be emitted to build a high-speed rail line. It is likely that operational savings would never recover this cost, especially since it would be far less expensive to power jets and automobiles with biofuels.
One thing is certain: building high-speed or even high-frequency rail will require lots of workers. Far from being a benefit, Canada is currently suffering a labour shortage that is not expected to end soon. If the government decides to spend billions on a rail line, it will only make the costs of housing, cars, and just about everything else rise even faster.
China, Japan, and Spain have practically wrecked their economies by spending too much on high-speed trains. Just because other countries are foolishly building high-speed rail lines doesn’t mean Canada should do so any more than the country should spend billions on other obsolete technologies such as telegraphs, electric typewriters, or slide rules. Taxpayers should tell the government not to waste money on such boondoggles.
Randal O’Toole is a transportation policy analyst and author of Building 21st Century Transit Systems for Canadian Cities. (20 pages) March 12,2024.
Business
You Won’t Believe What Canada’s Embassy in Brazil Has Been Up To
Canada’s embassy in Brazil has been having a terrific year. Well, at least that’s how it might look from the perspective of the 15 or so Canadians who live and work there.
Oh sure, they just faced a conviction in a local court over labour law infractions. And, OK, there are also multiple related cases pending. But the vibe down there must be great.
The Audit is a reader-supported publication.
To receive new posts and support my work, consider becoming a free or paid subscriber.
After all, it never snows in Brasilia and, not counting a half million Canadian dollars for security and “common services”, they spent $1.1 million keeping their various properties running according to a 2024-2025 budget document I’ve seen. Here, courtesy of Google Satellite, is what the embassy itself looks like:
And here’s how that $1.1 million in spending broke down:
To be sure, this isn’t a story about vast crooked fortunes being gained through devious financial scams. I’m aware of no 300ft luxury yachts being quietly moved between Dows Lake and the Bahamas each fall and spring. And it’s certainly reasonable for Canadians on foreign missions to expect to enjoy an above-average lifestyle while serving their country abroad.
But perhaps some of the spending here is getting a bit too close to the line. Take the ten pool covers purchased last year for nearly $25,000 (Canadian) in total. The budget document actually notes how such covers can help with the high cost of replacing water lost through evaporation.
In fact, water costs (totaling $103,000 that year) have been rising: they’re 20 percent higher than fiscal year 2022-2023. So it does seem that someone on staff is aware of the problem and is trying to address it. But a simpler solution might involve just shutting down at least some of the pools (there’s no way they need 10 covers for just one pool) or switching to using trucked-in water for the pools (which is supposed to be cheaper).
And how about the $16,900 spent on a Rational iCombi Pro Xs 6 2/3 220V Mono Elétrico oven for the official residence? Nice. But that’s around ten times the cost of a standard high-end home oven. Add to that the $2,140 spent on a KitchenAid 6.6L, Espresso Machine, Pasta Maker, Blender, and Electrical Slicer.
Don’t you just hate it when everything breaks down at the same time?
I realize that, in the grand scheme of things, nothing here feels all that evil. And I know it’s not fair to peer over people’s shoulders and judge their actions from such a distance. But it certainly does look like here’s yet one more Global Affairs Canada operation that’s missed the memo on the need to tone down public spending.
The Audit is a reader-supported publication.
To receive new posts and support my work, consider becoming a free or paid subscriber.
Automotive
Carney’s Budget Risks Another Costly EV Bet
From the Frontier Centre for Public Policy
GM’s Ontario EV plant was sold as a green success story. Instead it collapsed under subsidies, layoffs and unsold vans
Every age invents new names for old mistakes. In ours, they’re sold as investments. Before the Carney government unveils its November budget promising another future paid for in advance, Canadians should remember Ingersoll, Ont., one of the last places a prime minister tried to buy tomorrow.
Eager to transform the economy, in December 2022, former prime minister Justin Trudeau promised that government backing would help General Motors turn its Ingersoll plant into a beacon of green industry. “By 2025 it will be producing 50,000 electric vehicles per year,” he declared: 137 vehicles daily, six every hour. What sounded like renewal became an expensive demonstration of how progressive governments peddle rampant spending as sound strategy.
The plan began with $259 million from Ottawa and another $259 million from Ontario: over half a billion to switch from Equinox production to BrightDrop electric delivery vans. The promise was thousands of “good, middle-class jobs.”
The assembly plant employed 2,000 workers before retooling. Today, fewer than 700 remain; a two-thirds collapse. With $518 million in public funds and only 3,500 vans built in 2024, taxpayers paid $148,000 per vehicle. The subsidy works out to over half a million dollars per remaining worker. Two out of every three employees from Trudeau’s photo-op are now unemployed.
The failure was entirely predictable. Demand for EVs never met the government’s plan. Parking lots filled with unsold inventory. GM did the rational thing: slowed production, cut staff and left. The Canadian taxpayer was left to pay the bill.
This reveals the weakness of Ottawa’s industrial policy. Instead of creating conditions for enterprise, such as reliable energy, stable regulation, and moderate taxes, progressive governments spend to gain applause. They judge success by the number of jobs announced, yet those jobs vanish once the cameras leave.
Politicians keep writing cheques to industry. Each administration claims to be more strategic, yet the pattern persists. No country ever bought its way into competitiveness.
Trudeau “bet big on electric vehicles,” but betting with other people’s money isn’t vision; it’s gambling. The wager wasn’t on technology but narrative, the naive idea that moral intention could replace market reality. The result? Fewer jobs, unwanted products and claims of success that convinced no one.
Prime Minister Mark Carney has mastered the same rhetorical sleight of hand. Spending becomes “investment,” programs become “platforms.” He promises to “catalyze unprecedented investments” while announcing fiscal restraint: investing more while spending less. His $13-billion federal housing agency is billed as a future investment, though it’s immediate public spending under a moral banner.
“We can build big. Build bold. Build now,” Carney declared, promising infrastructure to “reduce our vulnerabilities.” The cadence of certainty masks the absence of limits. Announcing “investment” becomes synonymous with action itself; ambition replaces accountability.
The structure mirrors the Ingersoll case: promise vast returns from state-directed spending, redefine subsidy as vision, rely on tomorrow to conceal today’s bill. “Investment” has become the language of evasion, entitlement and false pride.
As Carney prepares his first budget, Canadians should remember what happened when their last leader tried to buy a future with lavish “investment.”
A free economy doesn’t need bribery to breathe. It requires the discipline of risk and liberty to fail without dragging a country down. Ingersoll wasn’t undone by technology but by ideological conceit. Prosperity cannot be decreed and markets cannot be commanded into obedience.
Every age invents new names for old mistakes. Ours keeps making the same ones. Entitled hubris knows no bounds.
Marco Navarro-Genie is vice-president of research at the Frontier Centre for Public Policy and co-author, with Barry Cooper, of Canada’s COVID: The Story of a Pandemic Moral Panic (2023).
-
Alberta2 days agoFrom Underdog to Top Broodmare
-
International2 days agoNetanyahu orders deadly strikes on Gaza with over 100 dead despite ceasefire deal
-
Business2 days agoCanada’s economic performance cratered after Ottawa pivoted to the ‘green’ economy
-
Business1 day agoBank of Canada governor warns citizens to anticipate lower standard of living
-
Business2 days agoCanadians paid $90 billion in government debt interest in 2024/25
-
Agriculture1 day agoCloned foods are coming to a grocer near you
-
International1 day agoUS Reportedly Weighing Military Strikes On Narco Targets Inside Venezuela
-
International1 day agoSagrada Familia Basilica in Barcelona is now tallest church in the world




