The Bridge with Peter Mansbridge - Your Turn -- Yay or Nay To High Speed Rail

Episode Date: May 14, 2026

There's a multibillion-dollar plan for high-speed rail in central Canada, and it's facing stiff opposition from many of those who would be affected locally. But as a so-called nation-building project, is it a good thing? You have your say today. Hosted by Simplecast, an AdsWizz company. See pcm.adswizz.com for information about our collection and use of personal data for advertising.

And hello there, Peter Mansbridge here. You're just moments away from the latest episode of the bridge. It's Thursday. It's your turn. The question this week, what do you think of the plan to bring high-speed rail in the link between Quebec City and Toronto? Good idea, bad idea? Too ambitious?

Not ambitious enough? What do you think? Plus, the random ranter. It's all coming right up. And hello there, Peter Mansbridge here. Yes. It is Thursday. Crawl on to the end of the week here.

But we're crawling with an exciting edition of your turn for this week. As I mentioned yesterday, we've been flooded with emails on this. This question about high-speed rail, which is of particular interest, obviously, to parts of southern Quebec and southern Ontario, because that's where the link is, supposedly heading at a huge cost somewhere between 60 and 90 billion dollars and that's just

the estimated cost you know how these things go be a lot more expensive i'm i'm guessing by the time it's done anyway that is the question for this weekend why have we had so many emails and i'm talking lots hundreds hundreds and hundreds and they're still pouring in and here's why It's gone well beyond our core audience, which is significant enough. It's substantial our core audience. It puts us in the top-ranked political podcast in Canada every week, the top-ranked Canadian political podcast in the Canada political podcast rankings by Apple. So we're pretty proud of that.

or, you know, we get more than a, well, we get our, we get listeners on series XM. We get over 100,000 listeners a week on our podcast. And we get upwards of 150,000 viewers on our YouTube channel. So we're doing great. We really appreciate that. And we hear every week from our listeners who write in in terms of the question of the week. But this week a little, I guess added bonus if you want to look at it that way. One of our listeners decided that I'm going to put this on my Facebook page

because all my friends in the advocacy group to stop high-speed rail on that particular. root. We'll then write in. But most of those, if not all of them, had never listened to the podcast, didn't understand the conditions that we place about, you know, 75 words or fewer,

you know the list. They didn't know that. So I got all these letters. See, a big long one, some essay length, like a really long ones. I'm not taking away anything from their passion about this subject. There's no doubt their passion.

about it and they feel very strongly about it. But it did kind of swamp. The meager little operation that we have here at the bridge. So all this to say that most of those letters don't get on, haven't got on. Not because we're biased against Facebook or possible nerd listeners,

but these people never listened. They didn't understand the rules and the conditions that we place on these things and therefore didn't meet any of them. However, we still got lots and lots of letters. And we're going to, we're going to go through them as best we can. There's probably, if you wrote in, one way or the other, if you wrote into the bridge this week,

my guess is there's probably a one in ten chance you've making it on the year because there are so many letters this week. But let's get at it. Let's see what we can't get in. Dave Cole from Wallaceburg, Ontario. That's southwestern Ontario, not too far from Windsor. Proposed high-speed rail project is a total waste of taxpayer dollars during these times. Money can be better spent on health care and other more important infrastructure improvements.

Pat Johnson in Charleston Lake, Ontario. I very much like the idea of having comprehensive public transportation. High-speed rail should be a part of that. I'm concerned about the way it's done. Maybe we could break our dependency on the foreign automotive sector by building a Canadian public transportation industry made in Canada for Canadians. Lori Coat in Dulkeith, Ontario, that's eastern Ontario,

but now or east of Ottawa. As someone who lives in the proposed corridor, I can assure you, next to no one in this region or any other small town is in favor of this insanity. The amazing thing is how many don't even know what it is or how drastically their lives may take a turn. Reeks of corruption. There's no proof of corruption,

but there's no doubt a lot of people think that. Andrea Glenn in Van Cleek Hill, Ontario, very close to Dalkeith. The original high-frequency rail plan made much more sense, using existing infrastructure, especially between Montreal and Ottawa, where Via already owns most of the track, combined with legislation prioritizing passenger rail over freight, would improve speed and reliability faster

and a fraction of altos, that's the name of this, social, economic and environmental cost. February and Butaman in Milton, Ontario. The high-speed rail will be priced expensively and still won't break even while drawing ire of many farmers. But you bet many people, including me, will try it at least once for the novelty, and it'll be seen as a point of pride of the country.

Tried it in Japan, Indonesia, and Italy, and they're all amazing experiences. Doug Bennett in Grimsby, Ontario, that's near St. Catharines. When it comes to the pros and cons of huge projects, like a high-speed rail corridor or EV mandates, or bicycle lane infrastructure, we have to stop thinking what's good for us now versus what's good for future generations.

We are responsible for building and paying for these projects in the near term, so our descendants will profit, just as our ancestors paid and built projects for us. Glenn Lee in Berlin, Germany. I was the vice president of the German-Canadian Business Club back in the day. I often met with Berlin-based Bombardier,

transportation folks here, they couldn't understand why Canada wouldn't implement a Canadian technology, high-speed trains. Delays just make the cost go up. Get it done. Neil Douglas Fraser in Edmonton. I say it's about time Canada implemented

high-speed rail transportation. Being an Albertan with family in Quebec and Ontario, I would prefer a rail line that spans the country to prevent being gouged by the, monopolistic airlines we have in this country. But you have to start somewhere. Sean Hindman in Petworth, Ontario, that's near Kingston. I don't feel the cost of people losing their homes,

communities divided, and an expense that everyone in Canada will have to pay for years is worth it. Many people won't use it. It's likely to be costly and inconvenient to find transportation to and from limited stations. No to Alto. Tim Stott in Minnesota, Manitoba.

We just returned from a trip to Europe where we utilize the train system in all five countries we visited, and to my surprise, it worked. It will fail in Canada. Two political, massive overspending, no routes outside major centers

like Toronto or Montreal, and it will be so expensive and inconvenient that it's not going to be viable for many Canadians. Gary Magwood in Plainville, Ontario. That's near Belleville. I do not believe the proposed high-speed rail is worth the staggering amount quoted to build it. It is not worth the major dislocation of thousands of citizens' lives, let alone the huge disruption to the villages and towns along either route. It is not worth the environmental degradation that will result from the construction phase

and continue throughout the life of this project. Martin Partridge in Peterborough County, Ontario. The alto-fast train corridor between Peterborough and Ottawa is causing high anxiety over land expropriations because many people believe that huge tracks of land will be gobbled up. In reality, the train corridor will be straight as an arrow and just 60 meters wide. The project will create 51,000,

thousand jobs and transform Peterborough from a struggling small city into a prosperous eastern Ontario hub. Toronto, Ottawa, and Montreal will be linked at last. You know, we did a little checking here. Alto does indeed say it will need just a 60 meter wide path, but it hasn't said exactly how much land it will expropriate. It does say landowners with parcels of land needed for the project will receive compensation based on several factors like the market value of the property, disturbance costs such as moving expenses, financial losses for business operations, and other specific difficulties for properties that aren't as easy to replace. Should only portions of the property be expropriated,

also says compensation will reflect any effect on the remaining land like awkward parcel shapes. The dollar amount will be determined by indebted, independent appraisals, but Altos says property owners can get their own legal advice and appraisal and will be compensated for those fees. Michael Artendale in Sudbury, Ontario, a place he says Alto won't go to, ever. If the attitude around Alto was around about 150 years ago, we wouldn't have a transcontinental railway, stop the endless consultation and start digging. and broadband in Ottawa.

I'm not convinced the case is there for high-speed rail. A better path is to use this nation-building momentum to upgrade what we already have. Improve via reliability, frequency, and passenger priority on existing lines, especially where CN controls the track and passenger trains are routinely sidelined. Europe manages freight largely off-peak and prioritizes passengers. by day. Canada can too. It's time to cancel Alto

before we turn momentum into a nation embarrassing project. Samantha Lombardo in Toronto. There are more urgent uses for this money. We need basic infrastructure and basic needs met across the country. Build hospitals, long-term care homes, affordable housing instead.

Put it towards sustainable agriculture to feed Canadians. Why would a project like this be prioritized. This train will benefit few and cause suffering to all living along the proposed line for generations. Whose idea was this? All right. Whose idea? Well, the idea of high-speed rail in Canada goes back at least to the 1960s. Toronto-Montreal route during the 1960s when the turbo train was introduced between Toronto and Montreal. It went as fast as 200-kilomers. in regular service at first, but poor track quality meant it had to slow down and was operated

161 kilometers an hour. It was pulled from service in 1982. So we've like been there, done that, and faced the consequences with it. James Lawley in Gannon-Aquake, Ontario. In my opinion, we don't need this high-speed rail project, and it's incredible expense and disruption to environmentally sensitive landscape and property owners. What we do need is reliable, timely, and frequent service along the corridor we already have. The federal government needs to negotiate arrangements with CN to upgrade and lay in the necessary extra tracks and signaling technology to provide fast and reliable passenger service. Lawrence Oronovich in Ottawa

I remember visiting Japan in the early 1980s and being amazed by their future. futuristic bullet trains. A few years later, when working for the federal government, one of my favorite files was, yes, high-speed trains. That was decades ago. Never happened. Will it finally happen now? Reliable on-time, high-speed rail in densely populated regions

would be a big green win for us all. So I hope so. Paula Baudry in Alfred, Ontario. Alfred is about halfway between Montreal and Ottawa on the old two-lane. highway between the two cities. Oh, that was a dangerous highway. Because of that, it had lots of people stopping for French fries and hot dogs.

The new multi-lane highway bypasses, Alfred. The high-speed train, here's the letter, the high-speed train is not worth the devastation to farmers, farmland, way of life, nature, animals, water tables, etc. Expropriation will displace many people that won't be able to afford the same quality of life elsewhere. The simple fact of being in the proposed corridor has devalued property already. Alto is not wanted, not needed. Judith Russell and Kingston, too expensive and very bad for the environment. I don't see the ridership needed to make this feasible. Why don't make a separate rail line for via besides CN and have express trains to the big cities and the milk run for all the little towns?

This would cost taxpayers less and work for all or most Canadians, not just a few. Deborah Joe Trojek, who says she lives between Sharbet Lake and Caledar in eastern Ontario. I used to drive through there all the time. That was the old route to get from Toronto to Ottawa. That's a pretty nice country too. Anyway, Deborah writes, this is a bad idea. It's not worth it. Personally, I have no need for a train.

if anyone has a use for a train, improve the rails that are already in existence. It's wrong to continue destroying our land for 1% of the world population. I want our children to experience the natural environment. Speed, greed, selfishness, artificial living should not be the education of our future generations. Please stop this madness. Christine Franzen in Dundas, Ontario. I don't believe the high-speed truce.

train is the most pressing project the country needs right now. While it would be fantastic to travel to Quebec rapidly, I would like to see more train access across the country to make traveling in Canada more efficient, affordable, and with a lower environmental impact than cars and planes. Harold Thompson and, Harold Smith in Thompson, Manitoba. My old haunts. I don't live near the Toronto to Quebec Corridor,

but I support better rail service, especially in dense populations. We need to break our almost total dependence on autos. Teddy Charles in Ottawa. A nation building project connects more than 13% of our country. Elizabeth Seard in Elgin, Ontario, that's south of London. I support growth and better transportation, but I don't believe the current plan is balanced.

Sorry, I had to cough there. Spending billions to connect major cities while disrupting rural communities, farmland, and small-town life feels unfair to country residents whose concerns are often overlooked. There's another letter from Helgun as well. This one's from Karen Hanna and Rick Harris. The Alto Project is reckless and unnecessary. Canada is known, respected, and loved for its vastness and its beautiful landscapes. I could better support projects that threatened to expropriate our land if they would improve the lives of Canadians, such as affordable housing or mental health facilities. Lori Burgess in Sydenham, Ontario, that's just north of Kingston.

While we desperately need improved transportation infrastructure in our vast country, we simply cannot afford the alto train. I'm not a board with a project that would create multi-term. generational debt. Not worth it for seven stops and a little time. Mary Jo Aitken in Kitchener. Our family is owned a cottage in eastern Ontario, potentially on the northern route, for 56 years. And a train through this environmentally sensitive area with tens of thousands of lakes and marshes would be expensive, highly disruptive, and impractical. Better ideas to invest in battery, electric planes,

for short routes and become a global leader. Julie Mulnar in Burlington, Ontario. I would prefer high-frequency rail over high-speed. I lived in Japan in the 90s. Nobody took the Shinkansen, their high-speed rail, to work. The common citizen was well served by high-frequency trains for their everyday travel, as they were more accessible and affordable for all. Ian Carter in Ontario, or London, Ontario.

Canada needs high-speed rail like a baffling technological miracle rather than a 1964 invention. While Europe and Asia enjoy 300-kilometer-an-hour dining cars, we're stuck behind freight trains moving at a crawl. Canada needs world-class city-to-city connectivity, and honestly, I just want to get from London to Montreal for the Grand Prix, without the high-speed part of my weekend. ending the moment I leave the racing track.

Is that too much to ask? Caitlin Knight in Rito Lakes, Ontario. That's eastern Ontario. I'm from rural Ontario, and this project feels completely disconnected from the realities average Canadians are facing. Spending $60 to $90 billion on a rail line while families struggle with housing,

food costs, health care, that's hard to justify. Sacrifice for the greater good only works when everyone shares in the benefit, not just major urban centers. Rob Milford in Clarington, Ontario, that's just east of Toronto. Investing in physical infrastructure delivers generational benefits. Building the train injects money into the economy while upskilling workers. Once operational, improved connectivity between cities would boost the economy, national unity, tourism, and academia through greater collaboration.

Every dither pushes these gains further out of reach. Martha Orloki in Air, Ontario, that's near Waterloo. Rail transit in Canada should connect our nation from coast to coast to coast. Major cities like Thunder Bay deserve passenger service, while regional connections can link smaller communities to urban centers. Canada once had this vision before rail lines disappeared in the 1980s and 1990s. expanding cargo and passenger rail, including high-speed rail between Toronto and Quebec City, would strengthen our economy and reduce congestion.

Catherine Aitken in Montreal, I do not agree with the impacts on nature. Will the volume of use really replace car and plane travel? I do not agree with people in the area losing their homes and farms and being inconvenienced. Look at other examples, like the Mirabell expropriated. Just got a cough again. One moment. Please. I'm back.

In 1969, here's the Mirabelle expropriation. In 1969, the government undertook the most extensive land expropriation in the history of the country. That was to build Mirabelle Airport, north of Montreal. The Canadian government expropriated approximately 12,000 people and 97,000 acres of land for the project. It wasn't long before Mirabelle became a white elephant. Jim Reed in Carlton Place near Ottawa. Alto is a gift to Quebec. They plan, build, and maintain it.

The destinations are a joke. Eliminate east of Montreal and add to west of Toronto to Niagara Falls. 14 million visitors a year and expanding to 25 million. Also, a hundred fewer kilometers of rail and expropriation. Robin Penrose in Yarker, Ontario. We got a lot of letters from Yarker, I'm assuming, thanks to those who pushed it outside the normal boundaries of our program, but that's fun.

As I said, all these people are very passionate. And the ones who followed the conditions of the bridge, some of them made it into the program. Like I'm assuming Robin Penrose. This train is being designed to, reduce commute times for a select few. But what about the hundreds of thousands of people along the route facing major detours because of dead-end roads and block crossings?

Emergency services could lose critical minutes and children already spending hours on school buses may face even longer trips. Why should rural residents bear these impacts so people traveling between Toronto, Ottawa, and Montreal can save an hour? too. Callum Arnold. Callum's from Guelph, but he's writing this one, I guess he's on old, he's in Sori, Liguria, Italy. Tough life there, Callum. Prime Minister Carney wants to build Canada strong. Sponsor the construction of a new railway system for freight that spans Canada. Then the old system can be refurbished and renovated gradually while being used exclusively for passenger rails.

freight cars shouldn't take priority over paying passengers and high-speed trains can't be commissioned while sharing rails with lower-speed freight trains. Tina La Hai in Inverary, Ontario. Once again, that's near Kingston. We need to stop comparing Canada to Europe. Their transport infrastructure has been built over decades, and their high-speed rail is beautifully incorporated

into an established rail network for over 50 years. We don't have near the infrastructure to accommodate this, nor the ridership. Diana Bayer in Smith Falls, Ontario, that's outside Ottawa. Who will take this train? Business people will still fly. Tourists with kids will still drive because tickets for a family of four will cost much more than a tank of gas. I will have to drive to Ottawa to catch the train to go to Toronto right now.

Via stops 10 minutes from my house, and that is how I go. Nice and slow and scenic. Canada's beautiful, so why would I want to go fast? Okay, we're kind of halfway. Let's take a break. Come back with a random ranter. He's got his rants, not on this. We've got lots more of your letters.

We'll get to them after the break and after the random ranter. So we'll be right back after this. this. And welcome back. You're listening to The Bridge for this Thursday. I'm Peter Mansbridge. Glad to have you with us. You're listening on Sirius XAM Channel 167, Canada Talks,

or on your favorite podcast platform. Glad to have you with us. Okay. As I said, Thursday's, well, therefore, the random ranter, as well as your letters. So let's see what the random rander has to talk about. this week. It's not about high-speed rail. It's about something else. Here he comes. Pierre Pollyev sure does get a bad rap. I mean, it seems like the guy is constantly taking shots

from everybody left, right, and center. And look, I know I'm guilty of it too. So today, I just want to show some empathy. And Pierre, if you're out there listening, I'm sorry. Your job can't be easy. You lead a party divided. I mean, there are social conservatives, progressive conservatives, there's the anti-vax crowd, the anti-abortionists, the bookburners, the libertarians, the blue Tories, the red Tories, and of course everyone's favorite, the F. Trudeau's and pickup trucks. It's not an understatement by any means to say that the Conservative Party of Canada represents a rich tapestry of diverse beliefs.

I mean, it's a pretty wide spectrum, from completely reasonable and valid to chemtrails and conspiracy theories. And the only thing holding them all together is Pierre Polyev and their tribal loyalty to the flag. Unfortunately, that flag is the conservative party banner and not the Maple Leaf, because the cornucopia of conservatism

is also overflowing with, successionists, separatists, and a whole bunch of fox watching Maple Maga, want to be Americans. So it really can't be easy for Pierre. I mean, how do you come up with a platform to please all those diverse beliefs and still hope to win in a general election? How do you compete when significant elements of your party look at any form of cooperation as capitulation or call any kind of reasonableness cuck. It's got to be tough and not tenuous tough. I'm talking impossible tough.

Yet in fairness to Pierre, he almost pulled it off. He garnered more votes than any other conservative ever. The only problem is that for all the voters he passionately turned on, there were more who were passionately turned off. And what makes him think that that will change next time? I mean, judging from the floor crossings, his caucus has some doubts. Polling isn't providing any secret sauce, and all the talk on the street is about how he's in trouble. That's never good.

In my experience, when people start talking about firing the coach, it's just a matter of time before the coach gets fired. Now, I look at Pierre-Polyev's situation, much the same way I looked at the last years of Trudeau. He's a leader who's outlived his effectiveness. He's maxed out and everyone kind of recognizes that the worm is turned and he's not the guy that's going to get it done. But the problem is there's no clear successor who can get it done. Now the liberals had Carney, someone largely untainted by Trudeau, with great credentials and connections to both Stephen Harper's conservatives and the environmental scene. He offered something for everyone. And it's not like the conservatives don't have people like that.

I mean, think of James Moore or Rona Ambrose or Tim Houston. They're all experienced, respected, reasonable people with lots of experience who could provide broad appeal among the general electorate. The problem is the squeaky wheels that drive the conservative bus don't want reasonable. They want someone steeped in vitriol, or at the very least, well versed in it. But vitriol is an American thing. It's a Fox News special. It's not that anger and outrage don't work. It's that in Canada, they're not enough to get you across that finish line. Now, I don't know how conservatives can sort this out without getting rid of some entire factions of their party. I mean, how is Pollyev supposed to herd all those cats? How can he square fiscal conservatives with social conservatives?

What about all the Alberta separatists in his ranks? I mean, at some point, there's going to, have to be a purge. And the only thing remaining to be seen is whether Pierre initiates it or ends up on the receiving end. Well, there you have him. A random ranter for this week. What do you think of that? Interesting theory. I'm sure Mr. Pauliev was listening. I don't know whether he does or he doesn't. He certainly did for a while when he was our guest. And that wasn't that long ago. It was a different sounding Pierre Polyev then than it had been before,

and it's a different sounding Pierre Polyev then than it is now. Pick your Polyev. Okay, back to your letters. On our topic for this week, which is about high-speed rail, and as I said, we got hundreds, hundreds of letters, many of which did not make it to error. Simply be either time or B, they failed to meet the conditions that are so obvious on our program

and made very clear to those who actually listen to the program. So let's get to some of those. John Minchell and Comox Valley, BC. Being from BC, I'm not really affected by this project. I can see the up and downsides, the issue. If done well, high-speed rail can be a good idea. I've experienced it during travels in Europe. However, can we overcome the not-in-my-backyard issues

and provide a rail service that is integrated with other transit and effective for the most passengers? Those are the questions we must answer. Jim Sellers in Edmonton. In Alberta, we have needed a rail link between Calgary and Edmonton for years. The argument against is we don't have the population. We have 5 million people. and at times they all seem to be on Highway 2.

That's the highway connecting them. Two big cities. I would add that Canada was built on the railway. It's ironic that we are without good passenger rail today. Allison Howie in Marysville, Ontario. That's on an island in the St. Lawrence near Kingston. Fix passenger rail for all. High frequency rail, bring us together.

Faster is not better. The world is fast enough. Luke Petroletal. Alco's economic benefits will last a century. Economics will reward newfound frictionless collaboration between Ontario and Quebec. A well-chosen route can showcase the beauty of rural Canada, and by moving passengers we make more room for agriculture on the freight network. Peterborough and Carlton Place can become hubs for regional transit expansion and connect Kingston to Ottawa.

On Altoa, you could go anywhere and be home for dinner. Susanna Copeland in El Dorado, Ontario, that's near Belleville. This high-speed train will be obsolete before it's finished, given the rapid advancement of technology and driverless vehicles. It's definitely a waste of taxpayers' money. Tim Wheeler in Lanark Highlands, Ontario, that's eastern Ontario. My concern is not high-speed rail itself, but whether Canada's governments have shown the ability to deliver massive projects

competently, transparently, and with a realistic business case. After years of promises on housing and infrastructure with little visible progress, many Canadians have lost confidence in large public projects. Before spending billions, governments first need to rebuild public trust that they can manage major projects responsibly. Don Ferguson in Victoria Despite my age, 78, and being retired in BC,

I am 100% in favor of the high-speed rail between Quebec City and Toronto. This will enable 20 million people transportation choices only found overseas. Scott Jansen in New Westminster, BC. It's good to see others plugging into this discussion. right? Not just Central Canadians. Canada should stop thinking rail versus cars and instead optimize for usable human time. High-speed rail makes sense in dense corridors like Toronto Montreal,

but overnight sleeper shuttles could connect the rest of Canada. Imagine taking high-speed rail to Toronto, boarding a sleeper at night and waking up at Lake of the Woods in time for a sunrise canoe. Sounds great. Real disruption is turning travel time into sleep, recovery, or productive time. Andrew Chisholm in Kingston, Ontario. I'm a train guy. The times I was taking via from Kingston to Toronto twice a month. I've taken the train to Nova Scotia dozens of times.

The high-speed rail proposal is a waste of money. Let's restore daily service to Halifax and Vancouver and add more and better commuter rail for our larger cities. that will do way more for the planet and our country than this unnecessary high-speed train. Little train history, you know, for some of us, going through all these letters. You know, I remember my first train trip

was from Quebec City to Ottawa through Montreal. That's after we landed in Quebec City in 1954. I remember traveling by train from Vancouver to Ottawa. for a Christmas break when I was in the Navy in 1966. And a fabulous trip across the country. It was a little bit crazy. We were young and wild. I remember taking the train from Winnipeg to Churchill.

That's a ride. So there's, we've all had, many of us have been lucky to have train rides and we'll never forget them. Yvonnev in Ottawa. Had the privatization of CN Rail in 1995 not taken place, there would be no consideration given to high-speed rail. The new owners prioritize freight over passenger trains,

nationalize the tracks or at least run new tracks, running parallel with the existing tracks. Buy more trains, run them often, more passenger express trains, all of the goals of Alto would be achieved at a much lower cost and with far less disruption to people's lives and to the environment. Paula Dairy in Montreal. When evaluating high-speed rail between Montreal and Toronto,

existing options must be considered. A flight takes about three hours and 45 minutes, downtown to downtown, including airport travel, wait times, etc., while the train takes about five hours. If via rail Canada can secure exclusive use of parts of the existing corridor and increase its average speed, it could offer a competitive service without the cost of building a new high-speed line. Josh Como in Montreal I think a high-speed rail project is long overdue and it's good we're finally doing it.

The Europeans are investing heavily in high-speed rail, $345 billion by 2040. I'm glad we're at least trying to keep up. Cale Thomas in Ottawa. The case for Alto is clear, but has been poorly articulated. There are 50 daily flights between Toronto and Ottawa and 80 between Toronto and Montreal, carrying over 4 million passengers annually. Population growth will only intensify pressure on these routes. Our airports don't have the capacity and fuel costs are volatile.

Rejecting the Alto investment now means paying. paying even more in the future for airport expansions and wider highways. Canada needs electrified mass transit. Tony Baza in St. Catherine's Ontario. I think it's a no-brainer. Just build it. Many people travel by rail. I've traveled to Montreal and Ottawa by rail. And it's a very comfortable ride.

If one checks the via rail schedules of trains traveling from Montreal to Toronto, there are at least five trains per day. So the demand is there. I think if we can have a Canadian go to the moon, we can build fast rail on the ground. Scott Burke in Halifax. This high-speed train should have happened 15 to 20 years ago. I've traveled on high-speed trains in Europe

and always thought we are missing out here in Canada. The Quebec City to Toronto population density makes it perfect for high-speed rail. As long as the cost of a ticket it is reasonable, it will be used by business travelers and tourists alike. Jane Nickel in Belleville, Ontario. High-speed rail will cost hundreds of billions of dollars. Look at the UK in California.

There's no business plan, no riders, the desecration of 25,000 acres, farms, families, wildlife, the environment, catering to Ottawa dandies. Most Canadians will never use it, but cost each household $8,000. We are a vast country, not tight Europe. Cancel this boondoggle. Evan Panton in North Vancouver. I think pursuing high-speed rail is a worthwhile pursuit and a big step in the right direction for Canada.

We're the only G7 country without this technology. The sooner we start converting congestion on our biggest highways into rail traffic, the better. Jean-Pascale de Vasseux in Ottawa. I oppose a high-speed rail project. The Toronto-Covec corridor lacks the population density that makes high-speed rail viable in Europe. About 15,000 people per kilometer of track versus about 20,000

on Madrid, Barcelona, and about 35,000 on Paris-Leon. With strong car dependence and preference for flexibility, projected ridership is uncertain. Robert Button in Richmond, BC. High-speed rail is exactly the type of nation-building project we should be pursuing. Like all transit projects, the positive outcomes are enormous but diffuse. This makes it an ideal candidate for government backing. Whether you use the line or not, you will benefit from the reduced emissions

and increased economic activity it brings. The cost is significant, but it will only grow if we drag our feet. Tanya Pulfer in Inverary, Ontario, near Kingston. When you think of Canada, you think of nature, lakes, animals, farms, not a rail system that will divide communities by not providing adequate overpasses for humans or animals. What happened to the climate leader Carney used to be? Chris Reed in Southampton, Nova Scotia. I don't currently use via rail,

because the cost is often comparable to or higher than air travel without offering the same speed or convenience. I would support high-speed rail if it were part of a long-term vision to eventually connect Canada from Vancouver to Halifax. However, I have difficulty supporting a project focused only on the Quebec City Toronto Corridor. It seems frivolous compared to the needs of the many. Ken Malagos in Regina

41 years ago I took one of the last southern runs through the prairies of via rail to Vancouver from Winnipeg. The Rockies were amazing. I regret the closing of this service. We originally built the railway line to establish Canadian sovereignty in the West to re-establish rail service across this country that is efficient and user-friendly

would be another way of establishing Canadian sovereignty. Don Dufour in Ottawa. For those of us, traveling between Ottawa and Toronto, the high-speed train will be wonderful. I currently travel the route four times a year, twice on via rail, and twice driving the highway. I'd love a high-speed, no driving option, and we'll use it in a heartbeat. It's about time. We up our game to join the rest of the G7 countries.

Penny Fox in St. Paul, Alberta. That's northeastern Alberta. There are many more things this country needs, like family doctors, new hospitals, hospital's decent infrastructure. Cutting up rural communities, the loss of productive farmland and ripping up wildlife corridors is not worth the value of a few hours save for those few who are traveling between those major cities. Let's get real and get our head out of the clouds. We're already too far in debt to even consider this.

Jan Jamison in Omemi, Ontario. It's near Peterborough. The investment in Alto will open up employment opportunities for struggling rural communities and enrich family life. The average family disposable income should rise with cheaper, quicker access to better paying jobs. Easier access to sporting events, entertainment, and colleges and universities,

it will reduce traffic on the major highways. It will reduce road accidents. Cindy Bolan in Sue Saint-Marie, Ontario. We don't need high-speed rail. We need an upgraded Trans-Canada Highway. Closures on the Trans-Canada are a national disruption to our infrastructure, cutting off provinces and negatively impacting our supply chains. The Trans-Canada Highway should be a top priority over high-speed rail for all Canadians,

not just the elite. This would be nation-building. Andrew Moore writes from Adelaide, South Australia. He's formerly from Candiac, Quebec on the south shore of Montreal. As someone who had to travel regularly between Montreal, Quebec, and Toronto for work, a high-speed train is sorely needed. I wish I had access to an affordable, more environmentally friendly option. Instead, I had to choose between via and flying.

Both are expensive and extremely inconvenient with their lengthy security checks. Affordable, reliable, and convenient transit is an accelerator, for the economy. Canada's competitiveness depends on it. Get near the end here. Jamie Button, Markham, Ontario. The high-speed rail project is a transformative leap for the Toronto-Montreal corridor. By mirroring the efficient European model,

utilizing dedicated electric tracks and speeds exceeding 300 kilometers an hour. It offers a sustainable alternative to costly carbon-heavy air travel. As fuel prices and airport delays mount, this modernized rail system promises reliable three-hour downtown to downtown connectivity, significantly slashing emissions while fostering economic growth, and seamless regional mobility akin to the French TGV. Janet Carr in Paris Sound, Ontario. Initially, I thought it would be pretty cool for Canada, have a high-speed train. However, the financial and environmental costs of this project are just too great, especially now. Only a small percentage of Canadians would ever be able to enjoy or even be able to afford to get on this train.

To those who will say, use it, I say, slow down. Smell the coffee on Via. David Cartwright in Port Dover, Ontario. For 30 years or more, I've heard of various decisions on linking Ontario with Quebec. Not just Toronto and Montreal, but also a Windsor to Quebec City corridor. Nothing happened. Toronto can't build subways on time and within budget, so it makes me think this high-speed train is just another pipe dream.

We'll be talking about a high-speed rail line for another 30 years. What do you think? Quite the selection of views and opinions from a cross-section of listeners. some who are loyal bridge fans, watch us, listen to us most days of the week. And others were new, kind of brought in by the Facebook crowd. Listen, you're happy to join us. Don't be shy. You can take part and listen to how we do things.

Thursdays is a day for your opinion. So that's why we call it your turn. and today we heard a lot of them. And we heard a lot of them from across the country, which is great to hear because this, as we know, is mainly a kind of central Canada project. But it was great to hear from our listeners from across the country. And I understand how passionate all of you are on this subject.

And as I said, there were hundreds and hundreds more. Quite something, really. Okay, that's going to do it for this day. I'm Peter Mansbridge. Thanks so much for listening. Join us again tomorrow. It's Good Talk. Chantelli Bear, Bruce Anderson.

Lots to talk about as always. You've heard the news over the last couple of days. You can be sure we'll talk and we'll be talking all about that. Anyway, we're done for today. Think about it. Think about the train. Slow and plotting. Fast and disruptive.

we heard it all today and I'm sure you made up your mind or certainly leaning one way or the other anyway thanks so much talk to you again in well in 24 hours