msb@lsuc.UUCP (Mark Brader) (02/24/86)
[From today's Toronto Star. Remarks in brackets like this are mine.] Ottawa (CP) [That's Canadian Press, not Canadian Pacific, of course!] -- VIA Rail could be forced to start cutting passenger trains or boost fares in 1988 to meet the dictates of long-promised legislation that is supposed to be its salvation. A proposed national rail passenger transportation act is to be presented in the House of Commons tomorrow [February 24] by Transport Minister Don Mazankowski, a decade after VIA was created by a cabinet order to take over the rundown passenger trains of Canadian National Railways and CP Rail. The legislation says VIA has two years to start breaking even on the operation of its trains between Quebec City and Windsor. It also must bring transcontinental trains to a 60% level of cost recovery, and trains serving remote areas must recover 40% of their costs. If these goals are not met, VIA may be required to cut train service or charge higher fares until it is on target. [This idea is similar to the way British Rail now works. There, Inter-City trains, freight, and parcels are required to be making a 5% return on assets (current cost basis) by 1988-9, while "provincial" and London & South East trains are allowed to lose some money.] Besides giving VIA an official status, the new bill is also designed to help commuter railways in Toronto and Montreal negotiate better deals with CN and CP for using their tracks. Details of the bill were obtained in advance by the Canadian Press. Critics say measures to make the railway break even and improve ridership would be self-defeating and would only reduce ridership. VIA officials said they are optimistic they will be able to reach those goals. They note that the costs of operating trains now are calculated in such a different fashion than what appears to be contemplated in the bill, so it is impossible to compare present cost recovery and the goals outlined in the bill. The legislation says VIA only has to pay the direct costs that CN and CP incur when operating VIA trains. But it provides no details on how those costs will be determined. The railways have a much different version of what constitutes direct costs than does VIA. The bill also says VIA trains must be given priority over freight trains "where reasonable." The railways now can make VIA wait for slower moving freights. And the bill doesn't clear up the liability issue facing VIA where the railways can bill the passenger service for all costs of a derailment or train collision even if VIA isn't at fault. VIA may have to pay the multi-million dollar costs of the February 8 collision between its Supercontinental and a CN freight near Hinton, Alta., which left at least 23 dead. It faces a similar fate over last weekend's collision near Berniere, Que., that injured 42. [But none seriously. This one seems to be a signal failure.] Auditor-General Ken Dye has chastised successive governments for failing to give VIA a mandate and a better deal on what it has to pay CN and CP to operate its trains. The service reported an annual deficit for 1985 of $524 million [~$400 million US], up 31% over the previous year.