---

Dissenting Opinion -
Progressive Conservative Party of Canada

Introduction

The Progressive Conservative Party of Canada has chosen to write this dissenting report to highlight concerns it has with specific items in the report. Although this is a dissenting report we would like to recognize the Committee's hard work in completing this report and we also recognize the very complex and difficult issues surrounding passenger rail service in Canada.

I Coast-to-Coast Passenger Service

Although the report assures a coast-to-coast passenger rail service in Canada, there is no guarantee that this will include year-round service. While it is recognized that in some areas seasonal tourist operators, such as the Rocky Mountaineer, have turned money losing passenger routes into profitable businesses, the Progressive Conservative Party is opposed to a seasonal service on any section of the Trans-Continental Line. This route, especially in Atlantic Canada, is a main transportation link to the rest of Canada for an increasingly alienated region and service should be available year-round.

II High-Speed Rail-The Lynx Proposal

The $7.5 billion dollar government investment proposed by the Lynx group is 44 times greater than the current yearly investment the federal government makes to operate the entire passenger rail network in Canada, which includes a year-round service from coast-to-coast-to-coast.

The Lynx group made a very short appearance before this Committee and created more questions about their proposal than answers. Not only was the necessary government commitment not clearly explained, neither was the impact on the current passenger rail network considered. The 1992 Report of the Standing Committee on Transport "High Speed Rail: The Canadian Concept" has as their first recommendation:

1. That the federal government should not make a financial commitment to the development of high-speed rail in the corridor at this time but, consider making a financial commitment if and when it has been clearly demonstrated that substantial and tangible socio-economic benefits will accrue to the public interest from such a transportation project.

It has not been clearly demonstrated at this point that the above conditions for a federal government investment in a high-speed rail system have been met. Also, the question must be asked: What impact would this high-speed train have on VIA Rail? This question must be answered before any government money is contributed to a competing service.

At a time when the federal government will not participate in essential funding with the provinces which is desperately needed to bring up to minimum standards our National Highway System, we believe the government should not participate in an optional $7.5 billion dollar investment in a high-speed rail system. It should be noted that this proposed high-speed rail system would only be 854 kilometres long, running between Quebec City and Toronto, and connect only two provinces.

Canada was built on our national rail system and it seems inappropriate to think that eight provinces are being left out to dry for the sake of two. In Atlantic Canada, only two provinces still have passenger service, and in the West service has steadily declined over the last number of years, which demonstrates that we must be vigilant to prevent any further erosion of our passenger rail system.

Conclusion

The Progressive Conservative Party of Canada believes in a strong revitalized rail service in Canada. It also believes that a service should be maintained year-round from coast-to-coast- to-coast. It also believes that passenger rail in Canada can and must be revitalized, as it is an essential piece of what makes Canada a great country.