April 3, 2013
Submission from the Coalition for Algoma Passenger Trains to
Northern Ontario Leadership Conference
Table of Contents:
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
Coalition for Algoma Passenger Trains (CAPT)
Introduction
Setting the record straight
Developing Passenger and Freight Service Consistent with Northern Growth Plan
Full potential of ONTC has not been achieved
Several models for rail in Northern Ontario to stay in public hands, including First Nation
ownership and management of rail lines
7. Economic, Social and Environmental Benefits
8. Replacing trains with buses is not modernization of transportation
9. Conclusion
1.
Coalition for Algoma Passenger Trains (CAPT)
The Coalition for Algoma Passenger Trains (CAPT) is a not-for-profit organization comprised of
individuals, businesses and other interests who recognize the significant economic, social,
cultural, historical and environmental value of passenger and freight rail servicing and
interconnecting the people businesses and communities of Northern Ontario’s Algoma District
to each other, Ontario, Canada and the rest of the world.
2. Introduction
There is a great need to broaden the transportation mix in Ontario in order to move beyond the
very narrow focus our province has had recently on exclusively road travel. That need is
recognized in the Northern Growth Plan which calls for multi-modal transportation, including
rail.
There is so much potential for the ONR to be developed into a highly effective passenger and
freight rail service if the proper direction were given to the ONTC, including an effective
governance structure. With the energy crisis and climate change, the need for passenger rail to
connect our northern communities with each other as well as with the rest of the province and
country has become imperative. When it becomes too expensive to drive and fly long distances
due to ever rising fuel prices and the urgency to reduce carbon emissions force us to use rail,
train service will be essential to the future of both Northern Ontario and the whole province.
Without it our communities could become ghost towns.
Replacing trains with buses is not a “modernization” of transportation. We badly need the
Northlander to travel to health care, to post-secondary education, for youth retention, to bring
tourists to our amazing tourism destinations and to help us travel long distances in dangerous
Northern weather. Our economy, our educational institutions, our health care facilities and our
communities are in urgent need of the reinstatement of the Northlander train and the
cessation of the divestment of the ONTC.
The ONTC must remain in public hands. If it is privatized, the private owner will naturally run it
exclusively to produce the highest profit margin. This means that small freight and passenger
service will be eliminated. Passenger service in all countries has to be heavily subsidized by
governments. The rail beds and passenger service need to be publicly funded as infrastructure.
Just like highways and public transit in cities, they cannot be run as businesses. They are
infrastructure that businesses require in order to prosper but they themselves cannot be run
like a business. Imagine the effect on business development and the overall economy if
highways were private businesses rather than public infrastructure.
The Coalition for Algoma Passenger Trains has been presenting a vision of a truly functional
transportation system in Northeastern Ontario—one that includes passenger rail.
3. Setting the Record Straight about ONTC
The Ontario government has not released any facts that dispute the analysis presented by the
Ontario Northland General Chairpersons’ Association (representing the unionized ONTC
employees) in its document entitled: “MoveOntario – The 23 cent solution’. That document
states that contrary to McGuinty’s claim that ONTC ridership had remained stagnant, “ridership
has seen increases year over year in all passenger services. The Northland ridership in 2009/10
was 31,746 and it increased by 10% in 2010/11 to 34,959. This year (2012), ending March 31,
ridership count is expected to jump an additional 16% to 40,552 riders”.
The inaccuracies of the Ontario government subsidy to ONTC as compared with its subsidies to
Metrolinx are carefully laid out in the “MoveOntario—The 23 cent solution” document which
can be seen at this link:
http://www.cawlocal103.com/docs/June%2011%202012%20GCA%20Presentation%20to%20Fi
nance%20Commitee.pdf
The investment to operate the Northlander passenger train ($11M) is estimated to be the same
amount as Premier McGuinty’s promise to refun GO transit commuters if delayed moren than
15 minutes on a GO train. (Ontario Northland General Chairpersons Association Submissions to Ont.
Government all-party Standing Committee on Finance & Economic Affairs, p. 3)
4. Developing Freight & Passenger Rail is consistent with Northern Growth
Plan
The following is an excerpt from the Northern Growth Plan:
5.3 A Multi-modal Transportation System
5.3.1 Transportation system planning, land-use planning, and transportation investments will be coordinated to implement this Plan.
5.3.2 The transportation system within Northern Ontario will be planned and managed with an
emphasis on opportunities to:
a. optimize the capacity, efficiency and safety of the existing transportation system
b. link major markets, resource development areas, and economic and service hubs
c. meet the needs of the existing and emerging priority economic sectors and help
implement regional economic plans
d. enhance connectivity among transportation modes including rail, road, marine and air
e. create or strengthen linkages between economic and service hubs and rural and remote
communities
f. reduce emissions and other environmental impacts associated with transportation.
By the Ontario government divesting ONTC it is eliminating its role in the first mode of
transportation that is listed in 5.3 (d) of the Northern Growth Plan which indicates that a multimodal transportation system will be planned and managed with an emphasis on all four
transportation mode: rail, road, marine and air.
5. Full potential of ONTC has not been achieved
For several decades the ONTC board has been made up of people appointed from Queen’s Park
who have had no relationship with the Northeastern Ontario communities served by the ONR.
A board with representatives from the First Nations, regional districts through which the rail
travels as well as local Chambers of Commerce and other stakeholder groups would be better
able to develop the rail services in ways which would benefit the region and thereby increase
passenger and freight usage of the line. Its sustainability would be greatly increased if it
reinstated passenger service to Hearst (and the Algoma Central Railway) and even extended its
service from North Bay to Sault Ste. Marie, thereby creating a connected passenger network
linking most of the municipalities and First Nations in Northeastern Ontario, with connectivity
to the main cross-Canada VIA line (“The Canadian”).
A board with representation from the communities would also develop small freight usage of
the ONR in addition to the big haul freight.
Finally, cooperation of the Ontario government in securing refurbishment contracts for the
ONTC rail coach refurbishment division rather than sending contracts such as the GO Transit
refurbishment contract to CAD Rail in Montreal would contribute enormously to the financial
sustainability of ONTC.
6. Several models for rail in Northern Ontario to stay in public hands,
including First Nation ownership and management of rail lines
There are several models that can be used for public ownership of rail lines:
 Provincial government crown corporation (e.g. ONTC)
 Federal government crown corporation
 Not-for-profit organizations, including:
 Consortiums of First Nations (Keewating Railway , Manitoba; Tshiuetin Rail
Transportation, Quebec/Labrador
 Consortiums of municipalities or regional districts (Red Coat Railway,
Saskatchewan)
 Consortiums of First Nations and municipalities or regional districts (Esquimalt &
Nanaimo (E&N) Railway, Vancouver Island)
 Producer cooperatives (e.g., Boundary Trail Railway Company, Manitoba)
Short summary about the Vancouver Island Railway, Tshiuetin Rail and
Keewating Railway:
The Esquimalt and Nanaimo (E&N) Railway or Vancouver Island Railway is a partnership
between First Nations and Regional Districts which formed a not for profit corporation—The
Island Corridor Foundation (ICF)—that owns and manages the 139 mile (234 kilometres) railway
from Victoria to Courtenay. It connects 13 First Nations territories, 14 municipalities comprising
5 regional districts, and several unincorporated communities. The ICF acquired the rail lands
from CPR in exchange for a tax receipt in 2004. Its vision is to preserve and use the Corridor as
one continuous corridor to connect and benefit all Island communities and First Nations along
the corridor. Its mission is to expand multi-purpose uses within the corridor, connect to services
beyond, and work with a rail operator to enhance freight, passenger and commuter services.
This is an excerpt from their website about the role of First Nations in the E&N Railway:
First Nations Partners
A Vision for the Corridor: A way to prosperity
If it weren’t for the vision and commitment of the Island’s First Nations peoples there would be no future
for our Corridor.
The Island Corridor Foundation is a partnership between local Governments and First Nations along the
E&N railway land.
It came about through the vision of the Cowichan Tribes, Mayors and Councilors from Vancouver Island
communities and railway enthusiasts who did not want to see the corridor divided and sold off in parcels
to private interests, to be lost forever to the people of the Island.
Because the Corridor serves 13 First Nations territories, it is an essential part of community and business
development plans in Aboriginal communities on the Island.
The plentiful natural environment that gave birth to the rich cultural traditions of the Coastal Salish, Nuuchah-nulth and Kwakwakaw’akw people has created abundant opportunities for new cultural industries
and tourism.
Improved rail service for freight, passenger and excursion travel and for commuter service will stimulate
the growth and development of First Nations’ businesses and communities across the Island.
Tshiuetin Rail Transportation Inc. is a railway that extends 134 miles (217 kilometres) through
the western Labrador and northeastern Quebec. It connects Emeril Junction, Labrador with
Schefferville, Quebec. The following 3 First Nations are its owners: Nation of Matimekush-Lac
John, the Naskapi Nation of Kawawachikamach, and the Innu Takuaikan Uashat Mak ManiUtenam. It began operating in 2005 and
now employs 40 people.
This is a quote from its website:
Tshiuetin means “North Wind”. A selected expression for a Nordic way and also
it underlines the impact of such a company for the aboriginal communities.
Indeed, it is a strong wind of freshness which blows now. For the first time in the
history of our country, a railroad is owned by a group of First Nations.”
The Keewatin Railway Company is a railway that runs 185 miles from Sherrit Junction,
Manitoba to Lynn Lake, Manitoba (formerly the Sherridon rail line). In 2006 it became the
second First Nations railway to be created with the financial support of the Government of
Canada. When the rail line’s previous owner announced its intention to abandon the line, the
following three First Nations---Tataskweyak Cree Nation, Mathias Colomb Cree Nations and
War Lake First Nation---signed a memorandum of co-operation to jointly assess and pursue
transportation opportunities in northern Manitoba. Having received the Federal government’s
commitment to provide funding for the purchase and operation of the railway, the three First
Nations formed Keewatin Railway Company and completed the purchase of the rail line by
2006.
This is a quote from its website:
Keewatin Railway was established to help build a strong local economy, by
introducing business opportunities and services that will benefit the region.
Three Key reasons KRC was established:
 Take over operation of passenger rail service in northern Manitoba from
VIA
 Access new business opportunities that would be available to an owner
of the railway
 Owning the Sherridon positions KRC to achieve this goal.
7. Economic, Social and Environmental Benefits
Economic Benefits
 relief from increasing costs of fuel
 reduction of highway maintenance costs1
 increased accessibility to N.Ont. for tourism
 combat youth–out migration and facilitate return to communities/ families
 economic diversity, development and skilled labour-force
 new rail technology a prime mover in economic growth
Rail as a transportation mode stands alone in its ability to combine energy efficiency with
economic and environmental benefits.
RAIL vs ROAD TRADEOFF STUDY Feb. 11 2013 KWG Resources Ltd estimate:
capital costs for a roadway: $1.052 billion and for a railroad: $1.561 billion.
operating costs per tonne: $6.33 for rail and $59.28 for trucking.
A gravel road costs 50% less to build than a railroad but the cost of upkeep and use of the gravel
road are almost 500% higher than the rail.
1
There is considerable documentation (e.g. Rubin, J (2009) Why Your World Is About to Get a Whole Lot Smaller:
Oil and the End of Globalization) to support the argument that fuel costs will continue to rise to the point that the
average wage earner will not be able to afford to drive or fly long distances. With rising oil prices, the cost of road
maintenance will also become unaffordable for government to continue at the current rate and standard of
highway maintenance and expansion. There is also evidence that it is less expensive to maintain rail beds than
highways--particularly over the vast distances to be travelled in Northern Ontario.
Environmental Benefits
 reduction of carbon emissions
 lower fuel consumption
 less asphalt
 fewer vehicles and transports on the road
 less disturbance of natural environment by multi-laned highways
 fewer toxic spills
Trains can move 1 tonne of freight 400 miles on a gallon of diesel fuel
Transports…………………..130 miles
Travel by rail produces 10 times less carbon emissions
than road or air
Social Benefits
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
aging population
students
people with special needs
connect communities
safe and reliable all season transportation
access health care
visit relatives
lower health, police, insurance costs from highway accidents2
With our vast land mass and sparse population, the cost of fuel and climate change:
• we can’t afford NOT to invest in rail and
• we certainly can’t afford more highway expansion
2
Hazardous road conditions and long distances can increase the number of highway accidents and injuries.
Passenger rail can reduce the number of disabilities caused by vehicle accidents. This can result in lower public
and personal costs of health care and other accommodations required due to the disabilities.
A Transport Canada report by Vodden, Smith, Eaton and Mayhew (2007) entitled Analysis and Estimation of the
Social Cost of Motor Vehicle Collisions in Ontario outlines and updates a 1994 Ministry of Transportation Ontario
(MTO) study on the social cost of motor vehicle crashes. While the 1994 MTO report focused only on Ontario, the
new report—based on 2004 collision data—includes estimates for all 13 Canadian jurisdictions, as well as a
national estimate. The study measured the economic and social costs of collisions. Some report highlights:
 The study estimates that collisions cost Canada $62.7 billion each year.
 This estimate represents about 4.9% of Canada’s 2004 GDP
 The cost estimate for Ontario is $17.9 billion or 3.5% of Ontario’s 2004 GDP
The estimate of the social cost of motor vehicle collisions includes direct and indirect costs: Direct costs relate
to property damage, emergency response, hospital care, other medical care and insurance administration,
out-of-pocket expenses by victims of motor vehicle collisions and traffic delays (lost time, extra fuel use,
environmental pollution). Indirect costs relate to human consequences of collisions, such as partial and total
disability of victims, activity and workdays lost—as well as the pain and suffering of victims and their families.
8. Replacing trains with buses is not modernization of transportation
Ontario has imposed a socio-economic dependence on roads by avoiding support of diverse
transportation options such as rail. To try to compensate, Ontario has overbuilt roads, the most
costly infrastructure to build, maintain and use. Overbuilding and over-dependence on road
transportation has become a money-pit for Ontario’s taxes and economy.
Roads are important transportation infrastructure for what roads are effective for— local
transportation of small loads and small groups of people. In Ontario we try to use roads for
everything even though we have long travel distances, substantial freight transportation needs
and winter.
Dependence on roads is a regression of our economy to the most primitive transportation
infrastructure. For all their costs, highways are essentially paved paths and automobiles are
motorized carts. The second innovation was of course water, which is far more efficient but
limited by where the water flows and winter. Rail is essentially a modern technological
innovation. Rail transportation is only a little older than air transportation as a technology.
Although some rail-like innovations date back to the 1600s, rail truly innovated as a successful
technology with the development of inexpensive steel in the 1800s. And rail continues to
innovate outside Canada. Bombardier, for one, now offers passenger trains that reach 150
km/hour on regular tracks, winter or summer. Of course these trains are running in many
countries except Canada because rail is not supported here.
9. Conclusion
Instead of looking into ways to increase ridership, Queen's Park has clearly neglected to
undertake any examination of options that might augment the numbers. Transferring
ownership and management of the ONTC to the First Nations and municipalities along its
corridor should be a serious consideration.
For example, adding a service from Sault Ste. Marie to Sudbury connecting at North Bay would
have been one way to increase passengers, especially travelling to Toronto, or managing the
bus service so short distance buses to more communities fed the train service instead of
competing with the train service would have been another.
The numbers being implied as the subsidized costs for the Ontario Northland are suspect at
best.
In the south, Metrolinx connects numerous communities to Toronto with annual subsidies in
the tens of millions. If this service is a necessity, then why can't it be expanded to include the
North? There is no region like the North that has such a great need for a comprehensive rail
passenger service that is more comfortable, and safer than bus service and less expensive than
air. Long distances, increasing gas costs, need to reduce carbon emissions, and hazardous
winter highway conditions are only a few of the justifications for such a service. Northerners
should not be construed as 'second-class' citizens!
The economic spillover effects of cutting ONR passenger rail will be huge in Northeastern
Ontario. One of the economic sectors that will be immediately affected will be tourism.
Another is post-secondary education - attracting more students to our northern colleges and
universities requires safe and affordable transportation. Most communities in Northeastern
Ontario have policies to encourage more immigrants and people from southern Ontario to
move here. Rail connectivity to the south should be paramount for the success of such plans.
The selling off of Ontario Northland Transportation Commission will eliminate most of the rail
component of the Ontario Government's Northern Growth Plan's multi-modal transportation
infrastructure strategy.
The divestiture of the Ontario Northland will undoubtedly mean the loss of hundreds of jobs
and the uprooting of families. At a time when job numbers in the Province are a major concern,
is this a good undertaking? What about the jobs and the dollars that would have been invested
in the City of North Bay had the Province given the mega dollar refurbishing contract for GO
Transit cars to the ONR shops instead of outsourcing it to a Québec firm. One can only surmise
that this latter decision was made to further abase the Ontario Northland situation.
Don't forget the investment we taxpayers have already made for this service.
Passenger rail service is being increased in southern Ontario and the fares are dropping.
We understand that the government is in a hard place with the economy right now, but that
will be made worse by cutting our publicly owned transportation institution.
Don't let down the north; instead, improve and increase the passenger rail service with a good
train schedule and you will see strong usage.