No. 5
May 2026
Carney Government's
Nation-Wrecking
in the Name of "Canada Strong"
• Carney's Bogus "New Government"
• Fraud of Helping Vulnerable Canadians
• Attempt
to Portray Massive Pay-the-Rich Schemes
as National Interest
In the Parliament
Letters to the Editor
• Working People Reject Machinations of Carney Government to Deprive Them of Their Right to Decide
Discussion
On the Nature of a
System in Which Decision-Making Is Dominated
by Factional Power Struggles Within an Elite Centre
• British Crisis-Ridden Cartel Party System Beyond Redemption
• Alto-Cadence High-Speed Rail Project Does Not Qualify as "Nation-Building": It Must Be Rejected!
Carney Government's Nation-Wrecking in
the
Name of "Canada Strong"
Carney's Bogus "New Government"
In the name of national unity and stability, the Carney Liberal government has converted the neo-liberal catch-all cartel party into a neo-liberal catch-all cartel party government. Prime Minister Carney calls it his "new government." This neo-liberal catch-all cartel party government is neither new, nor does it govern in the national interest or guarantee stability, as the Prime Minister claims. Far from uniting the people who are fighting to humanize the natural and social environment and engage in nation-building on that basis, power in the "new" catch-all government is more alienated than ever from the people, while police and military measures, intrigue and factional fighting have become the ways in which the state asserts its authority.
By bringing those who serve narrow private interests from all over the political spectrum into his neo-liberal catch-all cartel party government, Carney unites the factions in appearance only. Factional fighting in fact intensifies because the private interests the factions represent are fighting each against each and each against all to dominate and control the state with the aim of controlling the productive forces.
In 2017, when Justin Trudeau reneged on his electoral promise to end the first-past-the-post electoral system and unilaterally went against the recommendation of an all-party committee of the House of Commons to introduce a system of proportional representation, he declared that proportional representation would pose a threat to Canada by allowing "extremist" parties to win seats in the House of Commons. He implied that only those forces are legitimate that join in "big tent" parties, (the other name for catch-all parties). According to him, the Liberal Party of Canada was the natural governing party because it rules from the centre, represents everyone's opinions and interests and anyone who does not join is an extremist. Never mind that anyone in his own party, parliamentary caucus and cabinet who would not toe the party line was treated as persona non grata.
The
Liberal Party then declared itself a party without members,
which were
presumably not needed because it represents the national
interest and
catches all legitimate interests and opinions within its fold.
However,
the deep crisis of the
party-dominated system of representative democracy cannot be
ignored by
pushing the pretense that mass parties of the "big tent" variety
ipso
facto
represent "the people." Does the term "mass" when
applied to a political party merely refer to numbers or also to
its
quality? What is that quality? Does the answer to this question
not
concern the question of who wields political power and to what
end? Can
this issue be circumvented by creating something called "new,"
as in
Carney's reference to his government as "Canada's new
government"?
According to him, the definition of "new" is not a discernable
quality
but merely based on the claim that it is new because it is open
to
everyone on the political spectrum and, because it is open, it
is
democratic. Far from it. This is a travesty of not only the
quality of
what it means to be "new" and what is means to be democratic but
also
the role political parties are called on to play to
mobilize the
people to participate in the governing process.
Whether a government is based on one political party, or a two-party system or something else is not the key thing in governance of the bourgeois political process. The key thing is that it facilitates bourgeois rule. The demand to change the political process is not designed to eliminate parties or the party system. It is a struggle to hit at that aspect which deprives the people of the power to rule. The ultimate aim of the reform of the political process is to establish the people's rule. Through selection and election, people begin to become political and deprive the bourgeoisie of the ability to govern. This is the necessary groundwork to deprive the bourgeoisie of their state rule. This is the key thing in the reform that the Communist Party of Canada (Marxist-Leninist) is proposing and organizing.
The idea of selection is not to have "students," "workers" or "others" selected and elected. It is to smash the monopoly of bourgeois parties on politics and make them subordinate to the politics of the working class and people. It is to put them on the defensive. It is a device to encourage all political parties to be political in the true sense of the word. Most importantly, it is to ensure that the working class and people become political themselves and establish their own rule.
Fraud of Helping Vulnerable Canadians
The Carney cartel government has introduced measures it says will "alleviate the plight of vulnerable Canadians." The government does not identify who is vulnerable and why they are vulnerable. The mass media suggest that millions of Canadians including children are vulnerable to food, housing, crime and employment insecurity and further suffer from a lack of other essentials of a modern cultured life.
Vulnerable is defined in the Merriam-Webster Dictionary as a person in need of special care, support, or protection because of age, disability, or risk of abuse or neglect.
None of the measures Carney announced go to the root of why millions of Canadians are vulnerable and do little to address the symptoms. Vulnerable Canadians are those at the lower level of Canada's working class and have no control over official politics and the economy. The oligarchs have usurped political and economic power. They own the socialized economy and its enterprises both public and private and are striving to control the productive forces and productive powers which have grown exponentially as a result of the technical and scientific revolution. The working class must work in the enterprises of the ruling elite to acquire a living. Through ownership and control of the socialized economy, the ruling class dictates the fate of Canadian working people and what portion of the new value workers produce they will receive and how the rest is distributed.
Having millions of vulnerable Canadians, some who work and others who do not, is essential in the overall scheme of the imperialist class to enhance their private profits from exploiting the working class. The threat of being vulnerable is a major reason workers generally have to accept whatever the ruling elite dictate as pay and working conditions out of fear of having no job at all and becoming yet another vulnerable one.
The government
says to combat food and housing insecurity billions of dollars
will be
funnelled to the very food, construction and housing monopolies
that
are at the centre of Canadians' vulnerability. In a press
release, the
Carney cartel says that it plans to strengthen the private
enterprise
system that causes vulnerability and the big construction and
finance
companies that profit from it. For the ruling elite, the
existence of
vulnerable Canadians appears not as a problem to solve but
rather as a
way to enhance their private profits with pay-the-rich schemes
from the
state treasury and to keep the working class in fear of taking
action
to defend its claims and rights.
On housing the Carney cartel says, "The government plans to deliver 500,000 new homes per year and provide over $25 billion to fund affordable housing development." These public funds are to be turned over to private enterprise instead of establishing a public housing construction, maintenance and management enterprise to ensure housing as a right for all Canadians.
The Carney cartel also shields the food production, supply and circulation companies from accusations of price gouging and instead makes public funds available to them to strengthen their private profits. A press release says the government will direct $500 million from the Strategic Response Fund to help food suppliers expand capacity and increase productivity. Food businesses looking to make investments to strengthen their supply chains can apply to have some of those costs covered by the fund.
The governing cartel additionally announced a $150 million Food Security Fund it says will help small and medium-sized businesses to expand greenhouses and abattoirs, and strengthen their supply chains. This includes an immediate change allowing food production companies to write off fully from their gross income the cost of new or old greenhouses if acquired on or after November 4, 2025 to begin operations before 2030.
The Carney cartel also made much ado about changes to the GST rebate program replacing the dreaded word tax with benefit, now calling it the Canada Groceries and Essentials Benefit. The Goods and Services Tax or "benefit" when paid and then possibly refunded is a five per cent federal tax applied to most consumer items bought in Canada excluding what the government considers basic groceries. The federal tax is combined with a Quebec and provincial consumer tax, which ranges from an additional 6 to 10 per cent depending where you buy the good or service. Alberta and the territories do not have a separate consumer tax only the federal GST.
The GST rebate is itself an admission of the regressive character of consumer taxes, which raise the prices all Canadians pay for most essentials regardless of their individual capacity to pay. Such a regressive measure should have no place in a modern Canada. Also, the bureaucracy required to first assess and hand over the tax on the part of businesses and then have the government accept and then return some of it in the form of a rebate to 12 million Canadians is irrational and a costly waste. Consumer taxes as well as income taxes and most state fees should be abolished and replaced with direct government claims for the funding it requires on the gross income of enterprises.
The Carney fraud
is also evident when he speaks of "elbows up" to U.S.
imperialist
designs on Canada yet in practice further integrates Canada into
the
U.S. military economy. He speaks of seeking peace yet massively
increases the military budget to appease the U.S. and NATO
demand to
reach five per cent of GDP on war spending while refusing to
increase
investments in social programs.
The Carney fraud is exhibited in what they call Community Safety. The ruling cartel says the government is strengthening Canada's Criminal Code to keep violent and repeat offenders out of communities and is hiring additional RCMP personnel to combat crime. Are we to believe that the cause of criminal activity and violence against the people is the absence of police? What nonsense. Indigenous communities and an important number of non-white national minorities have long accused the police of targeting them for abuse. Reports also reveal criminal activity within the police forces themselves. The people do not want or need greater funding for the police and military; they want and need increased funding for social programs.
The fraudulent character of the Carney cartel government is evident through its actions. In response, Canadians are fighting against all egregious laws which not only pay the rich and make the people foot the bill, but even criminalize their opposition, take away their right to negotiate, eliminate environmental protections and much more. They have no choice but to organize themselves politically and to inform and engage themselves in collective defence of their rights and claims on the new value they produce and set a new direction for the country in opposition to the ruling imperialist elite.
Attempt to Portray Massive Pay-the-Rich
Schemes as National Interest
On April 26, Prime Minister Carney announced an "initial" federal government allocation of $25 billion in a public-private partnership (P3) fund to be known as the "Canada Strong Fund." According to the press release from the Prime Minister's Office (PMO), "the Fund will strategically invest, alongside the private sector, in Canadian projects and companies driving our economic transformation. This includes projects in clean and conventional energy, critical minerals, agriculture, and infrastructure."
Carney said further details on the fund would be outlined in the government's Spring Economic Update 2026, with further updates to follow in the coming months.
The Spring Economic Update 2026 was subsequently tabled in the House of Commons on April 28, by Finance Minister François-Philippe Champagne. Claiming the update focuses on "building a resilient economy amidst global uncertainty," it projected a deficit of $66.9 billion for the 2025-2026 fiscal year, a figure said to be $11 billion less compared to the previous projection from Budget 2025. It also introduced "major initiatives" said to be "in the national interest." This includes the "national sovereign wealth fund" called Canada Strong. Sebastien Betermier, professor of finance at McGill University's Desautels Faculty of Management and executive director of the International Centre for Pension Management, explains: a sovereign wealth fund is an umbrella term that can refer to many things, but in essence, it is a state-owned investment vehicle by which a government can invest public money towards a particular purpose."
In the words of Carney's "new government": "The Canada Strong Fund is Canada's first national sovereign wealth fund. It will invest in the major projects that are transforming our economy -- and give Canadians a direct stake in our nation's prosperity." Kept hidden is the fact that the $25 billion Canada Strong Fund is mostly borrowed money to subsidize pay-the-rich schemes. Canadians are already on the hook for the principal and interest on a $1.4 trillion national debt and this $25 billion will now be blithely added to this debt.
Enticing those with funds to invest by saying they are being offered a "stake" in "the nation's prosperity" gives some inkling into what is in store for the rest of the people -- the majority "stakeless" masses of Canadians, Quebeckers, First Nations, Métis and Inuit. Small businesses which invest will sooner rather than later go belly-up, either unable to compete or taken over by those who seek to either take over their capabilities or eliminate the competition. Calling small businesses "engines of growth" has always been a cruel euphemism to replace the harsh reality. The government will "seed" the fund with $25 billion dollars "for commercial returns and strategic national projects," Carney's "new government" announced. Who benefits from these "strategic national projects," and what is "national" about them is never discussed.
Besides the "Canada
Strong Fund," Canada's "new government" has pledged a
$755
million investment over five years "to strengthen Canada's sport
system, including support for athletes and grassroots
participation; [...] an enhancement to the Labour Mobility Deduction for
Tradespeople,
increasing the annual expense limit from $4,000 to $10,000 and
reducing
the distance threshold to 120 km;" and the announcement of
Canada's
first "Investment Summit scheduled for September 2026 to attract
global
capital." That is the one at which the retirement funds
Canadians and
Quebeckers depend on when they retire will be directed to invest
in the
projects which privatize social programs, fund war production
and the
theft of our resources and all the pay-the-rich schemes
sponsored by
the oligarchs who have usurped positions of privilege and power
in
Canada's "new government."
In the same vein, the Spring Economic Update 2026 extends "the Employee Ownership Trust (EOT) capital gains exemption and further details on capital cost allowances for low-carbon energy projects."
According to information provided, this update follows the shift in the federal budget cycle to the fall, making this the primary economic statement for the spring of 2026. The entire thing is geared to creating the impression that the massive pay-the-rich schemes are, in Carney's own words, "a series of nation-building projects in energy, trade, critical minerals, transport, data, and beyond [...] that will make Canada stronger, more resilient, and more independent. Through the Canada Strong Fund, all Canadians will have the opportunity to share directly in these benefits. This is our country, this is your future, and we are building it together."
An April 27 statement from the Prime Minister's Office says
that "To ensure Canadians have the option to invest in the
growth of our nation and share in the returns, the government
will launch a retail investment product" and that "Canadian
companies and investors are coming forward to build Canada's
future and investors from around the world are choosing to
invest in that future." The statement also says that "The
returns will be reinvested to grow the Canada Strong Fund, strengthening its capacity
over time."
Since the 1980s, public-private "partnerships" are pay-the-rich schemes which have become a preferred means of global monopolies and oligopolies to indebt the state for development of projects which private interests then own and control and profit from. The experience of the past 40 years has brought forth a plethora of studies and reports showing how the rich make use of such "partnerships" to fleece the public purse.
Writing in 2022, TML published one such analysis titled Confronting Public-Private Partnerships (P3s). It pointed out:
"These government expenditures have resulted in more individual taxation and, to cover deficits, greater state borrowing from many of the same global private investment cartels that then receive the money back as P3s and cheap infrastructure on top of the interest profit from lending money to governments. [...]
"The situation
poses a problem for the people but also opens a window on
solutions.
The problem is that the people exercise no control over the main
sectors of the economy and public and political affairs. The
solution
appears as a relatively seamless takeover of P3s and all major
investments by human-centred enterprises under the control of
the
people and accountable to them. These enterprises would be in a
position to control the value workers produce and claim a
portion of
the added-value as enterprise profit. If global private
interests wish
to invest in the project then they would receive a percentage in
the
form of interest profit but would exercise no control over the
direction of the project and how the value is distributed other
than to
receive their promised interest payment.
"In a modern economy in a large bountiful country such as Canada, outside investments should not even be necessary as human-centred enterprise could borrow directly from a public banking authority with the prospect of paying it back with the social value workers produce in the new investment.
"The issue for the people is to reject with contempt the extortion of the rich and their P3s and declare that through the people's own efforts they will build the New. Standing in the way is the political control of the rich and the ideological crib clouding our minds that modern educated working people themselves are incapable of building the New through democratic renewal and humanizing the social and natural environment."
(News Release from the Office of the Prime Minister, April 27, 2026. TML)
In the Parliament
Bills Under Consideration
As of May 7, the Carney government has presented 31 bills, of which 16 are still pending. They are listed below.[1]
It is noteworthy that several of the bills increase police powers, including the Combating Hate Act which is directed at targeting the human right to speak freely and the movement in support of Palestine, Iran and Lebanon. Besides others, one bill to keep track of is Bill C-25 which proposes more changes to the Elections Act. Having already passed legislation that gives political parties carte blanche to use private information of people on the voters' lists without being subject to privacy laws, with this bill the cartel parties are aiming to shut down the Longest Ballot Project and thereby squelch the people's movement for the democratic renewal of the electoral process.
There is nothing in the legislation before Parliament that is not self-serving for the ruling elite. The content of these laws underscores the need to oppose the criminalization of people's resistance to the anti-social offensive and nation-wrecking, and the necessity for democratic renewal to empower the people.
In related news, the Hill Times reported that of the
16
government bills that as of May 4 had made their way to third reading in
the House
of Commons, only five received a recorded vote. "All five bills
were voted on prior to the Liberals gaining a majority on April
13,"
the Hill Times informs. The
remaining 11 were passed on division (i.e., not unanimously) without a formal tally
being
conducted.
"During the current Parliament, MPs have been less likely to stand to cast their vote on government legislation to send it off to the Senate than in previous sessions.
"Instead, the majority of government legislation is being approved at third reading in the House on division without a recorded vote," the Hill Times writes.
The newspaper quotes Democracy Watch co-founder Duff Conacher as saying that not having a recorded vote shields MPs from accountability. Voters "have the right" to know where their MPs stand, he said. "Unfortunately, the system has made MPs under the control of party leaders, but part of trying to maintain their proper role is ensuring accountability to voters by giving details about where their MP actually voted," he said.
Conacher said it is up to MPs to "free themselves" from party control. "Unfortunately, they seem to be quite content with the reward-and-control system that party leaders have all put in place," he said.[2]
It is also noteworthy that after the Carney Liberals secured a majority following all the floor crossings and desertions and the April by-elections, the government administration quickly moved to take control of key House of Commons committees. Their composition was changed to give the Liberal cartel party government absolute control and it was declared that their proceedings will be held "in camera." This will definitely not show that Carney has the consent of the governed to pursue his nation-wrecking agenda. Of course it will ensure that Canadians have no knowledge of how decisions are reached and what are the issues. It is part of Carney's arrogant "I can explain but you wouldn't understand" persona.
Note
1. List of Bills Under Consideration in the House of Commons
Bill C-8: An Act respecting cyber security, amending the Telecommunications Act and making consequential amendments to other Acts
Bill C-9: An Act to amend the Criminal Code (hate propaganda, hate crime and access to religious or cultural places) (Combatting Hate Act)
Bill C-10: An Act respecting the Commissioner for Modern Treaty Implementation Short title: Commissioner for Modern Treaty Implementation Act
Bill C-11: An Act to amend the National Defence Act and other Acts (Military Justice System Modernization Act)
Bill C-14: An Act to amend the Criminal Code, the Youth Criminal Justice Act and the National Defence Act (bail and sentencing) (Bail and Sentencing Reform Act)
Bill C-16: An Act to amend certain Acts in relation to criminal and correctional matters (child protection, gender-based violence, delays and other measures) (Protecting Victims Act)
Bill C-20: An Act respecting the establishment of Build Canada Homes (Build Canada Homes Act)
Bill C-21: An Act to give effect to the Red River Métis Self-Government Recognition and Implementation Treaty and to make consequential amendments to other Acts (Red River Métis Self-Government Recognition and Implementation Treaty Act)
Bill C-22: An Act respecting lawful access (Lawful Access Act, 2026)
Bill C-25: An Act to amend the Canada Elections Act and to enact An Act to change the names of certain electoral districts, 2026 (Strong and Free Elections Act)
Bill C-26: An Act to authorize certain payments to be made out of the Consolidated Revenue Fund for the purpose of improving housing supply
Bill C-27: An Act to give effect to the Final Self-Government Agreement for the Tlegohli Got'ine and to make consequential amendments to other Acts (Final Self-Government Agreement for the Tlegohli Got'ine Act)
Bill C-28: An Act to amend the Aeronautics Act and other Acts (Canadian Space Launch Act)
Bill C-29: An Act to establish the Financial Crimes Agency and to make consequential amendments to certain Acts and regulations (Financial Crimes Agency Act)
Bill C-30: An Act to implement certain provisions of the spring economic update tabled in Parliament on April 28, 2026 (Spring Economic Update 2026 Implementation Act
Bill C-31: A second Act to implement certain provisions of the budget tabled in Parliament on November 4, 2025
2. "Off the record: government bills increasingly passing House without recorded tally," Neil Moss, Hill Times, May 6, 2026
Letters to the Editor
Working People Reject Machinations of
Carney Government to Deprive Them
of Their Right to Decide
The recent floor
crossings of Conservative and NDP MPs to the ruling Liberal
Party have
once again made clear one basic fact: fundamentally, all three
political parties are the same. That is why jumping from one to
another
is no big deal. In fact, in the past, election campaigns have
been run
by progressive forces based on the well-conceived slogan, "Don't
vote,
they're all the same."
How are they all the same? In so many ways, including that they all represent the interests of private capital rather than the public will, they all have zero commitment to assisting their public constituency, they all have no intention of letting their constituency members influence their policies, and so on. One might of course ask, if they are all the same, then why do they all exist? A key reason is that multiple parties give the people the illusion that they have some kind of real choice as to who will rule over them. But only the illusion. The multiple parties in Canada, including the fake socialist party, give no real choice. Not only that, their very existence blocks putting forward any genuine alternative to them.
As Lenin said when commenting on the results of the 1912 U.S. elections: "This so-called bipartisan system prevailing in America and Britain has been one of the most powerful means of preventing the rise of an independent working-class, i.e., genuinely socialist, party."
Reader in Northern Ontario
One of the most frequent comments I have seen about Carney's speech announcing the "sovereignty fund" is how many times he mocked reporters for "not understanding" him because his intellect is so high above everyone else. It goes to show how important this matter of bullies making decisions is.
Reader in Montreal
The workers see every day how decision-making escapes them in a big way. So much so that it has become a key issue in every battle for everyone. It seems nothing can be achieved or headway made without dealing with that problem.
Today's announcement in the budget of $3 billion for the training of construction workers is not at all for the well-being of the workers. Among other things, it is to meet the demand of the construction companies for the removal of all health and safety regulations and laws and personnel on dangerous construction sites. Many lives are at stake.
Quebec Construction Worker
CPC(M-L)'s analysis that Carney's "new" government, as he likes to call it, will only increase, not decrease competition is astute and accurate. The claim that by bringing into it the ideologies which have hitherto been seen to represent the "conservative right" and "socialist left" wings of the political spectrum, while he himself is characterized as a "right of centre" liberal, and that his government represents "stability and the national interest," is self-serving and fraudulent.
Besides achieving his aim of establishing a majority government through manipulation and deals struck in the corridors of power behind the backs of the people, the Prime Minister is establishing a government filled with very expensive representatives of narrow private interests who dance to the tune of those interests. This will whet the appetite of those competing interests which is insatiable. Cartoons which show them at the table stuffing themselves with the spoils of their plunder of Canadian resources and the state treasury are apt indeed. I am certain that the workers of this country will puncture their arrogance and give them the comeuppance they deserve.
Retired Telecommunications Worker in Alberta
The propaganda is non-stop in the media, government ads and so on about Carney's "strong Canada" and how it provides stability. The reality, as pointed out in the Party's May Day statement, is that the oligarchs are wrecking the social and natural environment by giving themselves "unlimited powers to rule by decree." Every day more facts come out on the tens of thousands of workers losing their jobs in Auto, the public sector, in the communications sector and more. It is clear that the counterrevolution the neo-liberal governments have unleashed in their desperation to guarantee their profits uses their positions of power and privilege to target the working class. It is indeed up to the working people to hold them in check.
Ontario Autoworker
How the Catch-All party government is working in Ottawa is
similar
to what has taken place in Quebec where Coalition Avenir
Québec (CAQ) gathered people from the top-tiers of the private
sectors as well as pilfered from other parties in what was to
be
a perfect "catch all" but as it became exposed as the
party of
the oligarchs and corruption, members started to leave to either
join
other cartel parties where they thought their prospects would be
better. That government is using its positions of privilege and
power
to carry out corruption on a grand scale.
Reader in Montreal
Discussion
On the Nature of a
System in Which Decision-Making Is Dominated
by Factional Power Struggles Within an Elite Centre
British Crisis-Ridden Cartel Party System
Beyond Redemption
A series of resignations at the heart of the British government has followed exposures of the appointment of Peter Mandelson as UK ambassador to the U.S., intensifying pressure on Prime Minister Keir Starmer. What appears as a scandal over a diplomatic post is at essence part of the broader political crisis centred on decision-making, accountability, and the concentration of authority within Downing Street.
The most senior departure came when Morgan McSweeney resigned as Starmer's chief of staff on February 8, saying he accepted responsibility for advising the prime minister to appoint Mandelson in 2024 despite Mandelson's past association with Jeffrey Epstein, the late U.S. financier and convicted sex offender. McSweeney said the decision had undermined public trust and that stepping down was the "only honourable course." His resignation was widely seen as an attempt to absorb political blame and stabilize the prime minister's office.
The scandal escalated after the Epstein files suggested that Mandelson, while serving as business secretary during the 2008 financial crisis, shared sensitive government information with Epstein. Other documents referred to financial transactions from Epstein to accounts linked to Mandelson in the early 2000s.[1] These disclosures have not yet resulted in criminal charges.
Starmer has acknowledged that the vetting process identified a continuing friendship between Mandelson and Epstein after Epstein's 2008 conviction, but said officials were unaware of its full extent. He apologized for relying on what he described as misleading assurances from Mandelson and promised to release government emails and records relating to the appointment.
Mandelson had been dismissed from his ambassadorial role in September following earlier revelations. While he has not been arrested or charged, the Metropolitan Police have confirmed that they are investigating potential misconduct in public office, though stressing that he is not accused of any sexual offences.
The fallout widened further with the resignation of Tim Allan, Downing Street's director of communications, shortly after McSweeney's departure. Starmer accepted both resignations and praised McSweeney's role in Labour's 2024 election victory. Then on February 12, the prime minister announced that Chris Wormald was stepping down "by mutual consent" after just over a year as cabinet secretary, a civil service post.[2] Together, the departures have been used to reinforce perceptions of instability within No. 10. In an attempt to use the Mandelson affair to undermine the government's senior leadership, Conservative leader Kemi Badenoch has said responsibility ultimately lies with the prime minister for the appointment.
Beyond its immediate party-political impact, the affair brings to the fore the present state of the arrangements of the British executive. Central to this is the constitutional status of the Downing Street chief of staff. This is a role with no statutory basis and no formally defined responsibilities, deriving its authority from delegation by the prime minister.
The role sits at the centre of No. 10's hybrid structure -- simultaneously a political headquarters, policy hub, communications operation, and executive command centre -- and involves overseeing the prime minister's private office, controlling the flow of information and access, managing senior political advisers, and aligning party strategy, government messaging, and legislative plans. Working alongside, but not subordinate to, the cabinet secretary, the chief of staff acts as the prime minister's political counterpart to the civil service leadership, coordinating across departments. In a system where power is highly concentrated in Downing Street, the role of the chief of staff has become decisive, and the chief of staff can exert considerable influence over political strategy and senior appointments.
Ambassadorial appointments, for example, are formally made under the royal prerogative, exercised on ministerial advice, typically that of the foreign secretary with close involvement from the prime minister's office. In reality, such advice is developed at the centre of government, where senior political advisers play a key role. These political advisers are not directly accountable to parliament. While parliamentary committees may seek evidence from them, this depends on convention rather than statutory obligation.
The resignation of Tim Allan further highlights the extent to which prime ministers rely on a small, unelected group of senior advisers. Interim replacements were appointed without any prescribed process, parliamentary scrutiny, or publicly defined remit. Authority was transferred through internal political decision rather than constitutional procedure, underlining the informality of power at the centre.
Taken together, the Mandelson affair illustrates how power within the British executive has become concentrated in Downing Street and mediated through advisers rather than ministers or cabinet. As authority is centralized within the prime minister's office, traditional checks and balances associated with the ostensibly collective cabinet government have been long-since removed. Decisions of diplomatic and political consequence can be shaped by individuals who wield significant influence yet bear no direct constitutional responsibility. At the same time, when advisers are presented as bearing responsibility for controversial decisions, they can play the role of scapegoats.
The way these figures exit office highlights the nature of a system in which decision-making is dominated by factional power struggles within an elite centre. These factions share a determination to control the centre of power, even as the resulting disarray stands in stark contradiction to the broader interests of society and the well-being of the people.
In other words, the affair points beyond individual misconduct to the operation of the cartel-party system, a system that is descending into warring factions. Such a system both fosters and feeds off individual corruption: it is generated by concentrated authority and unaccountability, then managed through resignations and internal adjustments that leave the structure itself intact.
It is clear that the people reject this situation. They are striving to find ways to speak and act in their own name and work out the forms of their own decision-making power. They certainly reject the present situation where those who are elected by them and usurp their name are then unaccountable to them, and decision-making at the heart of government goes on behind a veil. The conclusion is that new mechanisms must be brought into being which guarantee the accountability of the elected, the right of all to elect and be elected, and the end of the party-dominated system of government, which is showing itself to be completely dysfunctional. A new authority of the people is required. It is a problem taken up for solution.
Notes
1. Sylvia Hui, "UK leader Starmer's chief of staff quits over Mandelson-Epstein scandal," Associated Press, February 8, 2026
2. "Wormald would be the third cabinet secretary to be forced out," King's College London professor of government Sir Vernon Bogdanor said. "Before the departure of Sir Mark Sedwill in 2020 it was generally accepted that the cabinet secretary had security of tenure."
Alto-Cadence High-Speed Rail Project
Does Not Qualify as "Nation-Building":
It Must Be Rejected!
Protest against Alto-Cadence project in St. Augustin, March 7,
2026
The following brief was submitted by retired geological engineer Fernand Deschamps to the Federal Crown Corporation Alto on April 24, 2026, as part of Alto's three-month public consultations for a High Speed Rail project along the Quebec City-Toronto Corridor.
My brief is titled "The Alto-Cadence High-Speed Rail Project Does Not Qualify as 'Nation-Building': It Must Be Rejected!" It aims to address the concerns expressed by many thousands of people that will be impacted by the proposed Alto high speed rail (HSR) project. They are workers and farmers living along the proposed HSR corridor between Quebec City and Toronto who rightly question the legitimacy of such an undertaking that is presented by the Carney government as a "nation-building" project. What is nation-building about this project?
In the collective
mind of Canadian and Quebec peoples, the building in the 19th
century
of the trans-continental railroad from Montreal to Vancouver was
a
nation-building project that gave a sense of purpose to the
nascent
nation. It was also the first modern link for people and
merchandise to
move across the country from the Atlantic to the Pacific Coast,
while
allowing the vast wealth produced by the Canadian working class
and
farmers to contribute to Canada's "coming of age." What does the
current Alto-Cadence High-Speed Rail Project contribute to as
concerns
the interests of the peoples of this country in the 21st
century?
As concerns the original nation-building project built from coast to coast in the 19th century, it became obvious after a century that the passenger train service had to be separated from the train operations of moving products across the country due to the increased volume of trade and this was done while still sharing the same rail lines. In the course of this, VIA Rail Canada was established as a Crown Corporation in 1977 after taking over rail operations of both Canadian National (CN) and Canadian Pacific (CP), (now CPKC). Financed by the federal government, today it operates all intercity passenger railway services in Canada. In 2023, VIA's ridership exceeded 4.1 million passengers. In a typical year, VIA operates approximately 400 trains per week in all regions of Canada over approximately 12,500 kilometres of rail.
VIA Rail's initial high-frequency train (HFR) project, set up in 2022 to further modernize passenger service across Canada, was then, through sleight of hand in 2025, transformed into a high-speed rail (HSR) project dedicated to a unique corridor between Quebec City and Toronto. No reason has been given to explain why VIA Rail does not qualify for modernization or why the new HSR is nation-building when all evidence shows it to benefit a private consortium that will reap the profits, while the federal government will assume all the financial risks, with Canadians and Quebeckers footing the bill.
The evidence raises the issue of the long-term viability of such a project, which runs counter to the very developments currently taking shape in the field of artificial intelligence (AI), to name but one issue. All of it begs the question: what is nation-building about this HSR project when VIA Rail can do the job the people require by modernizing it to meet expectations and requirements? There do not seem to be any nation-building aims behind what the Cadence consortium is doing.
Despite this, the
Carney government presents Alto's HSR as a "nation-building"
project
that "will transform the country." If that is the case, how come
people
have no say in the decision-making process and there is nothing
transparent about the consultation process? The consultations do
not
appear to be honest. They appear to be intended to sell a
project
already decided but which does not stand up to the scrutiny of
the
people. All of this came out clearly during the public
consultations
organized by Alto between January and March of this year. As is
shown
in the many comments posted on social media and testimonies of
those
who went to Alto's public meetings, the Alto representatives
were not
even interested in listening to the needs of local communities
through
which the HSR corridor will pass. Besides all the people whose
land is
to be expropriated, the railway workers who maintain and operate
Canada's vast rail network should also have a say, instead of
being
stuck with a fait accompli, as is the case right now.
Included with this brief are samples of what people had to say.[1]
Public-Private Partnership for a Québec-Toronto HSR Will Lead to Underfunding of Via Rail's Canadian Passenger Rail Service
"Why is VIA Rail being underfunded?" is a legitimate question. On the Alto website, in the Public Consultations -- FAQ (frequently asked questions) section, the following response is given to questions about whether the high-speed rail project will be affordable and how it will be funded.
"One of the project's goals under the government-mandated initiative is to make services much more accessible and affordable" and "Long-term financing is expected to combine private investment, fare revenue and targeted public funding. The private partner will also assume some construction and operating risks."
We already know that the Quebec City to Toronto HSR project will serve only seven cities: Quebec City, Trois-Rivières, Laval, Montreal, Ottawa, Peterborough and Toronto, whereas VIA Rail trains between Quebec City and Toronto can serve up to 15 different cities, not to mention the multiple stops within cities such as Toronto and Montreal.
The single corridor between Quebec City and Windsor accounts for 95 per cent of all passengers travelling across VIA Rail's entire Canadian network, as well as 80 per cent of VIA Rail's total revenue.[2] This revenue is currently used to subsidize the other, less-frequented destinations across VIA Rail's entire Canadian network. (See figure 1)
Figure 1. Map showing the various
routes of the VIA Rail national passenger network.
During Transport Canada Deputy Minister's appearance before the Committee of the Whole (CoW) House of Commons on June 5, 2025, it was revealed that "two Crown Corporations in the Transport Portfolio received funding to support and advance the HSR initiative: VIA Rail received $8 million and Alto received $597 million in 2025-2026. For VIA Rail, this [...] will support the planning and eventual transfer of their Quebec City -- Windsor Corridor passenger rail services to the private partner" (emphasis added). In other words, VIA Rail is set to lose its most lucrative market to benefit the private consortium Cadence selected by Alto.
The Standing Senate Committee on Transport and Communications, which examined the section relating to the high-speed rail project in Bill C-15, An Act to implement certain provisions of the budget tabled in Parliament on November 4, 2025, produced a report on February 12, 2026 in which it states that: "The committee raised concerns about how having HSR along the Quebec City-Toronto corridor would affect the viability of VIA Rail's current services. Transport Canada stated that communities currently served by VIA will continue to be served and that service may be 'optimized.' The committee questions that assumption."
Taylor Bachrach, MP for the British Columbia constituency of Skeena-Bulkley Valley, was one of the members of the Standing Committee on Transport, Infrastructure and Communities that produced a report in September 2024 entitled "Issues and Opportunities: High Frequency Rail in the Toronto to Quebec City Corridor." This is what he said in an interview with CBC News on February 19, 2025 about the transfer of the most lucrative passenger rail market from the Crown corporation VIA Rail to the private consortium Cadence: "The Liberals plan to essentially hand over ridership to the private sector [...] and VIA Rail is going to be left with the crumbs. [...] They are going to be left with a fraction of the revenue they use to operate rail all across the country." He added the government should instead be working with VIA to provide improved service nationally. Here is a table showing the most vulnerable national passenger rail routes across Canada that are at risk of being cut. (See Table 1.)
Table 1. VIA Rail routes in Canada
at risk of being cut
As Western governments carried on with the anti-social offensive in the 1990s, VIA Rail, like many other state-owned corporations, became a target of major cuts as a way of handing over huge sum of public treasury money to big private interests: in January 1990, Brian Mulroney's government cut VIA Rail's service by reducing its rail network by roughly 50 to 55 per cent, eliminating thousands of kilometres of track, and laying off 2,761 workers, thereby eliminating numerous rural and regional routes across the country. Many cities -- such as Regina, Calgary, and Thunder Bay -- lost their main passenger rail services. Most of these routes were never restored by Jean Chrétien's Liberal government or by subsequent governments.
The transfer of revenue from the Quebec City to Windsor corridor to privately-owned Cadence recreates this vulnerability for what remains of the VIA Rail network -- this time without the possibility of restoring the cancelled services by reinvesting revenue from the same corridor, as this revenue now belongs to a private consortium under an operating concession that will span more than 30 years.
VIA Rail High Frequency Rail Project Became Alto-Cadence
High Speed Rail Project
In September 2024, the Standing Committee on Transport, Infrastructure and Communities published a report entitled "Issues and Opportunities: High-Frequency Rail in the Toronto to Quebec City Corridor."[3] In the 66-page document, the Committee made 18 recommendations, including the following, which were never implemented by Mark Carney's government:
"Recommendation 4
"The Minister of Transport require VIA HFR-VIA TGF Inc. to provide within six months a budget and a timetable for completing this project, including an analysis of the incremental cost between HFR and HSR, and that this report be tabled in the House of Commons and reported to committee.
"Recommendation 6
"That the government release the Joint Project Office's full, unredacted report on the HFR project.
"Recommendation 10
"That the Government of Canada and VIA HFR -- VIA TGF Inc. ensure that HFR does not result in a reduction of service to communities currently served by VIA Rail and that VIA's regional rail services be connected to the future HFR service wherever possible."
In a letter addressed to the Chair of the Standing Committee on Transport, Infrastructure and Communities dated October 10, 2025, Transport Minister Steven MacKinnon announced that, as of February 19, 2025, the High-Frequency Train (HFT) project has now been "transformed" into a High-Speed Rail (HSR) project.[4] In making this announcement, MacKinnon attempted to justify his government's decision not to publish "an analysis of the incremental cost between the HFR and the HSR" and not to "release the Joint Project Office's full, unredacted report." Instead, a redacted version of this report was published.
In the same letter, he notes that "on September 11, 2025, the Prime Minister announced that the Major Projects Office would work with Alto to accelerate engineering, regulatory, and permitting work to enable construction of the initiative to start in four years, cutting the original eight-year timeline in half." He adds that the "collaborative design phase between Alto and Cadence [...] does not involve the construction or operations of the new passenger rail system, which are subject to future Government decisions."
Some decisions were announced as early as November 18 when Finance Minister François-Philippe Champagne tabled Bill C-15, An Act to implement certain provisions of the budget tabled in Parliament on November 4, 2025, in which the entire Division 1, Part 5 of the bill is devoted to the Alto-Cadence high-speed rail project. Bill C-15, passed by the Liberals and Conservatives on March 26, grants extraordinary powers to the Minister of Transport regarding the expropriation of land along the corridor to "cut the original eight-year timeline in half" for the start of construction work along the HSR corridor.
This new project runs opposite to the recommendations of the Standing Committee on Transport, Infrastructure and Communities, which proposed adding an additional track dedicated to the HSR alongside the existing CN and CPKC railway lines. This would have minimized expropriation of land and environmental damage, whilst allowing existing stations along the Quebec City-Toronto corridor to be retained.
The Carney government has guaranteed the private Cadence consortium funding for the construction of the HSR corridor, as will be the case for the first planned section between Montreal and Ottawa. In other words, it will be Canadians and Quebeckers who, by the end of the project, will be left with a debt estimated at around $9,000 per family with two children. Already, everything points to there being enormous costs associated with the construction of the Montreal-Ottawa section, for which no geotechnical study has been carried out.[5]
The Issue of Saving Travel Time and Who Benefits
The claim made by the promoters of the Alto high-speed rail project is that it will cut travel time between the major urban centres along the Quebec City-Montreal-Ottawa-Toronto corridor. According to them, this would be "beneficial" for business people who frequently travel along this corridor.
Here is what one internet user, who closely follows developments in the travel sector, had to say:
"The idea that the Quebec City-Toronto 'corridor' needs a high-speed train for professionals is based on 20th-century logic. The increasingly important role of artificial intelligence (AI) and digital interaction is the 'X factor' likely to lead the project to failure. Here are a few reasons for this shift:
"- Digital presence: by 2026, business travel budgets haven't completely 'disappeared,' but they have changed radically. Meetings that once required a return trip to Ottawa are now managed via spatial computing and high-fidelity AI avatars.
"- The myth of the 'human connection': whilst many still believe that 'business is done over a meal,' the data shows that internal business travel (meetings between colleagues) has fallen significantly.
"- Risk associated with passenger numbers: if 40 per cent of scheduled 'business class' seats remain empty due to AI-driven remote collaboration, ticket prices for all other passengers would have to double to keep the train running.
"If it's not business travellers, then who will use the TGV [HSR]? If business travel declines as several analysts predict, Alto will have to rely on travellers travelling for leisure or tourism. This poses a major problem regarding the enormous cost this will entail:
"- Ticket costs: occasional travellers and families are far more price-sensitive than business travellers, whose expenses are covered.
"- The 'time versus money' dilemma: for a family of four, the five-hour drive is often 'worth it' as the marginal cost is limited to petrol. If Alto tickets cost more than $150 per person, the car wins out every time, regardless of the time saved.
"This project remains a gamble in the physical world. It is based on the assumption that, despite AI, humans will continue to want or need to travel on a large scale between cities. Without a future where 'physical presence' is a luxury rather than a necessity, Alto's high-speed train could well become the world's most expensive 'monument to the past.'
"Given experience in the fields of manufacturing and technology, the fact remains that the most efficient system is one that minimizes unnecessary movement. If AI ends up almost completely eliminating travel, a $90 billion train is the ultimate 'over-engineered' solution."
McGill University Study Further Corroborates that the HSR
Will Not Serve the Majority
A study conducted in 2025 by researchers at McGill University entitled "High-Speed Rail in Canada: Insights from a Corridorwide Survey & a Financial Analysis" highlights, from a financial perspective, how the Alto project is structured so that it is always the people who foot the bill for something which does not benefit them.[6] Here is what one citizen who read the report had to say:
"The model starts with 11,380 one-way daily riders. It doubles that to 22,760 when return trips are counted, then adds another 10 percent for international tourists, reaching 25,289 passengers per day in the first year of operation. It then assumes induced demand growth of 6.8 percent annually from Year One to Year Six, then 0.8 per cent, then one per cent up to Year 50."
"The total capital cost is estimated at $79.8 billion, based on $70 million per kilometre plus $5 billion for land acquisition. The financing model assumes a PPP [public-private partnership] structure where government covers one-third and private investors cover two-thirds at an eight per cent annual interest rate. It also depends on $12 billion in land value capture."
"Even with all of those assumptions, the report still arrives at a required annual repayment of about $3.66 billion, average annual operating costs of about $166.56 million, average yearly revenue of about $2.60 billion, and average yearly subsidies of around $1.23 billion."
"The table two at the end makes the problem even clearer. In Year One, projected revenue is $1.18 billion while the subsidy need is $2.61 billion. In Year 25, the subsidy is still $1.34 billion. Only in Year 50 does the model show a small surplus of $0.22 billion."
Table 2. Assessment of annual HSR
demand, revenue and subsidy needs for the HSR. The table
displays
selected results at five-year intervals. (These calculations
assume the
PPP model proposed of one-third of the total cost being paid by
the
government and 15 per cent of the total cost being covered by
land
value capture.)
Alto's Claim that HSR Will Be a "More Environmentally Friendly Mode of Transportation"
In a brief submitted on March 6, 2026 to the Senate Committee on National Finance regarding Bill C-15, Ed Reid, a private forest owner/manager and wildlife biologist, writes:
"First there is the HUGE carbon foot (CO2 equivalent) of Alto construction (5.5 million tonnes CO2e). This is the CO2e equivalent of 53.4 million 500 kilometre car trips! But that's just the carbon footprint of Alto's construction. ADD to that the loss of CO2 sequestration resulting from its destruction of land (+54,000 tonnes CO2e/year) PLUS its operation (up to +9000 tonnes CO2e/year).
"To summarize Alto's CO2 footprint simply: IF -- in some make-believe future -- 100 per cent of those who currently drive between Toronto and Ottawa (1.6 million per year) and Toronto and Montreal (2.0 million per year) took ALTO instead it would still take about 30 years just to offset Alto's massive CO2e footprint!"[7]
In conclusion, despite the claims by Alto-Cadence and the Carney government that this HSR project is one of "nation-building" that "will transform the country," it is becoming increasingly clear to a growing majority of Canadians and Quebeckers that this project will ensure, through federal financing, guaranteed profits for the private consortium. It will also contribute to the destruction of what remains of VIA Rail's national network, while burdening the Canadian and Quebec peoples with debt for generations to come. It must be rejected!
Fernand Deschamps, B.Sc.A., M.Sc.A., B.Ed.
Retired Geological Engineer
Notes
1. Alto-Led Consultations: Neither Credible, Nor Legitimate
In an open letter published on April 17, in La Presse, Alto's CEO writes: "To date, more than 260,000 people have visited our online platform and over 10,000 have attended in-person meetings. We are committed to following best practices in project development by seeking feedback from the very earliest stages."
For the thousands of people living along the proposed high-speed rail corridor who have attended face-to-face meetings with Alto representatives, it is clear that this is, above all, a sham consultation process. The numerous comments posted on social media by those who attended the in-person meetings are highly revealing of the approach taken by the Alto team to promote the HSR project without ever truly addressing the legitimate concerns of those who will be directly affected by it.
Here are excerpts from comments, views, research and questions circulating on social media and elsewhere regarding the Alto high-speed rail project. And day by day, the discussion has continued to grow in scale.
A participant in a consultation held in Vankleek Hill, a rural village of 1,781 inhabitants located about 100 kilometres east of Ottawa, told CBC Radio on March 21 that residents were deeply disappointed by the whole process. She explained that the format involved dividing participants into small groups, accompanied by Alto representatives tasked with guiding them through the consultation, but that there had been no centralized presentation of information. She added that it was up to participants to ask questions, but that when they did, Alto's representatives had very few answers.
She said it seemed that, as far as Alto was concerned, the consultation was merely a box-ticking exercise, rather than a genuine effort to listen to people. She said she found Alto's behaviour baffling, noting that as a small business owner, one has to provide comprehensive information to secure a bank loan. She concluded that it is up to Alto to prove to Canadians that they should support this project.
Community Safety
The same resident of Vankleek Hill spoke about how the community's safety concerns are yet to be addressed. She stated that "one of our big concerns as a community member is this train is high speed. At 300 kilometres an hour, it has no level crossing. You cannot have a road where it goes. So it's going to dead end roads throughout the community. They're not going to obviously be able to afford to provide an over or underpass for every community road that currently exists. So what is the interval that those over or underpasses are going to occur at? They couldn't tell us that. So what does that then mean for things like emergency services? How long is it? How long is it going to take EMS to get to a farm that is burning down or somebody who needs to get to a hospital, which already are far apart in a rural area?"
Going Through the Motions of Public Consultations
A resident of South Frontenac Township, just north of Kingston, also spoke to CBC Radio about how the community is organizing itself to "help our area residents understand this project, be educated about this project, and sort of bring a voice to their concerns through social media and other engagement. Because Alto's engagement process has really fallen short in rural areas."
She pointed that Alto's consultation process is primarily online, but this is a problem for rural areas where there are people who still have unreliable internet service. She added that at first, Alto was "only going to have in-person sessions in the cities that would receive a station or a stop. And so we had to fight and ask and plead through social media to have a session, an in-person session in the very area that's going to be affected, you know, that would impact people's lives and livelihoods. So now that was agreed to, and they were smart enough to host a session here. And we were invited as a committee to be present. And when a resident asked an Alto representative 'how are you recording all of our concerns?' they were told, 'We have excellent memories.' And that is not enough in a democratic process. We have had to become sort of armchair experts on all kinds of issues in the last three months in order to be able to participate in the consultation process."
Another writes: "I would like to share a thought: If the outcome of a consultation is predictable before it even begins, is it truly a consultation, or simply an attempt to create the illusion of public support for a decision that has already been made? I think it is essential to pay attention to how these decisions are presented, and not just to the decision itself."
Project of National Interest?
Someone states, "Transport Minister Steven MacKinnon needs to hear from everyone about how the high-speed rail project, presented as a project of 'national interest,' will actually divide Canadians, not only because of the 3.6-metre fences and dead-end roads, but also by creating inequalities between those who can use the rail and those who cannot. There are only seven stops: Quebec City, Trois-Rivières, Montreal, Laval, Ottawa, Peterborough, and Toronto. Please share this message with citizens of other provinces, because we are all paying for this project, but only some will be able to use it."
One person told CBC Radio that the enormous cost of the high-speed rail project has to be justified. "This is a project that, despite what they say, does not serve all Canadians. I would like them to justify $90 billion. It is $2,500 per taxpayer, and it apparently is not going to break even for 44 years. So I would like them to justify that cost."
Alto Removes Pins from Interactive Map as Consultation Period Draws to a Close
A man writes: "My 84-year-old mother received this email yesterday from Alto's moderation team, Bang the Table (incidentally, this is an Australian company. Why not use a Canadian company? I thought this was a 'nation building' project, promising jobs to Canadians?)
"Moderators said her pin comment 'failed to respect other users and was potentially intended to harass or insult.' [...] Please read her comment below and see for yourself that there is absolutely nothing that would qualify as harassment, insult or failure to respect others. How many other pins are being deleted with no valid reason, just before the end of the consultation period? [...]"
His mother's comment associated with the post:
"The proposed Alto High Speed Rail project undermines priorities that matter far more to Canada's long-term resilience. At a time when Canadian food security is increasingly fragile, we should be protecting and strengthening our agricultural capacity -- not placing additional pressure on it. Rising transportation costs and volatile diesel fuel prices already make it harder for farmers to operate and distribute food efficiently. At the same time, there is growing reluctance to rely on imported American fresh produce, making domestic production even more critical. Farmlands, apiaries, and agro-tourism operations are not just economic assets -- they are essential parts of a sustainable food system and rural livelihoods. These landscapes support pollinators, local economies, and community identity. Disrupting or reducing them for large-scale infrastructure would be so very wrong! We need to protect and invest in these resources, not destroy them. No Alto HSR! Upgrade the VIA system instead!"
2. "Beyond HFR -- Advancing Passenger Rail Across Canada," Transport Action Canada, July 2024
3. "Issues and Opportunities: High-Frequency Rail Service in the Toronto to Quebec City Corridor," Standing Committee on Transport, Infrastructure and Communities, September 2024
4. Letter from the Minister of Transport and Government House Leader to the Chair of the Standing Committee on Transport, Infrastructure and Communities, October 10, 2025
5. When Critical Information Based on Scientific Investigation Is Brushed Aside
There are numerous critical engineering and environmental issues, also present on the Montreal-Laval-Ottawa section, to which Alto never provided answers during its public consultation process.
For example, Leda clay (also known as quick clay or sensitive marine clay) is a post-glacial marine deposit laid down in the ancient Champlain Sea around 8,000 to 10,000 years ago. It is found throughout the Ottawa-St. Lawrence lowlands. When undisturbed, it is weak but stable; when disturbed by construction loading or vibrations, it can liquefy catastrophically. The Saint-Jean-Vianney landslide, which occurred in 1971 in the Saguenay region, Quebec, which killed 31 people, was a Leda clay failure. High-speed rail cannot be built over it using conventional gravel embankments, and will necessitate construction on pylons in several places.
Furthermore, Alto hasn't revealed the millions of cubic metres of plastic foam required to build high-speed rail through soft ground, both as thermal insulation under the track and as lightweight structural fill over unstable soils such as the Leda clay present along the Ottawa valley. Buried plastic foam leaches chemicals into groundwater over decades, including a potential human carcinogen and substances that harm aquatic life. At end of life, the foam must be dug up and disposed of, a liability because some of this foam may legally qualify as hazardous waste.
"Extruded polystyrene (XPS) is a dense, rigid foam board -- the same category of material as the pink or blue insulation boards used in building construction. In railway engineering, XPS boards are laid continuously under the entire length of the track to stop winter frost from penetrating the ground beneath. Without this layer, repeated freezing and thawing would heave and distort the track. Frost in the Montreal-Ottawa corridor can penetrate 1.2 to 1.8 metres into the ground in a cold winter. XPS keeps the subgrade above freezing.
"Expanded polystyrene (EPS) geofoam is the lightweight foam used to build up embankments over soft, unstable ground. It looks like the white bead foam in packaging, but comes in large moulded blocks. At 15-30 kg per cubic metre, it weighs roughly one to two per cent of what conventional gravel fill weighs. This matters enormously over Leda clay -- an unstable post-glacial soil found between Ottawa and the St. Lawrence -- which cannot support the weight of conventional fill without sinking by 0.5 to 1.5 metres. EPS geofoam dramatically reduces this load."
6. "HSR -- a multi-billion-dollar lie wrapped in academic credibility," Concerned Citizens Against the Alto Southern Route, Valentin Baciu
7. Brief submitted to the Senate Committee on National Finance on Bill C-15, Ed Reid, March 6, 2026
(To access articles individually click on the black headline.)
Website: www.cpcml.ca Email: editor@cpcml.ca