Opinion: Rail proposals to airport and Banff are in national interest
Recent announcements by the province and the federal government bring us closer than ever to making passenger rail service from Calgary International Airport to downtown and onward to Banff a reality. These are no longer long-term dreams; they are shovel-ready projects that meet criteria for designation as national interest projects under Canada's newly passed Building Canada Act.
Article content
Article content
The Alberta government's Passenger Rail Master Plan Update, released in late June, confirms the overwhelming public mandate for action: 91 per cent of Albertans want passenger rail operational by 2030, and 80 per cent support provincial investment in its development.
Article content
Article content
Through consultations with more than 20,000 residents, the plan identifies Calgary to Edmonton and Calgary to Banff as backbone routes for future regional rail networks — that could reduce congestion, boost tourism, lower emissions, support housing affordability, and create jobs.
Article content
The plan aligns with Calgary's Airport Rail Connection Study, released in January, which calls for a seamless 'one-seat ride' from the airport to a Grand Central Station in the Rivers District via the CPKC rail corridor. This connection, referred to as CADE (Calgary Airport-Downtown Express), complements the CABR (Calgary Airport-Banff Rail) proposal, which would connect key communities in the Bow Valley, including Cochrane, Mînî Thnî (Kananaskis), Canmore and Banff.
Article content
Article content
At the federal level, the passage of Bill C-5 on June 26 is a game-changer. The Building Canada Act expedites federal reviews for infrastructure deemed to be in the national interest, shifting the focus from whether a project should proceed to how it will be built. Railways, as well as pipelines, as promoted by Premier Danielle Smith, are explicitly included, and Alberta now has an opportunity to act quickly and secure federal designation for CADE and CABR, unlocking faster approvals and potential investment.
Article content
These projects check all the boxes:
Article content
CABR is already backed by Liricon Capital and Plenary Americas, and has secured an assignable memorandum of understanding with CPKC, critical private-sector momentum that supports a P3 delivery model, for which the province has expressed interest. The infrastructure bank has previously pledged support for CABR and is actively seeking financially sustainable, clean-growth infrastructure opportunities.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
CTV News
9 hours ago
- CTV News
Danielle Smith faces hecklers at Alberta Next panel meeting in Edmonton
Edmonton Watch Alberta Premier Danielle Smith faced a tough crowd in Edmonton as part of her Alberta Next panel on Thursday. CTV News Edmonton's Marek Tkach has the story.
Winnipeg Free Press
10 hours ago
- Winnipeg Free Press
Feasibility without First Nations isn't feasible
Opinion Earlier this month, the governments of Ontario, Alberta and Saskatchewan signed an agreement to explore the 'feasibility of a new west-east pipeline to bring western oil and gas to southern Ontario refineries and ports.' In a news release, Alberta premier Danielle Smith said: 'By advancing a Canadian energy corridor from Alberta to Ontario, we are securing long-term energy access for families and businesses, creating thousands of jobs, and opening new doors for trade and investment, while strengthening our position as a global energy leader.' There's only one problem, and it's a big one: Manitoba Premier Wab Kinew didn't sign it. So much for feasibility. Since the federal government's passing of the One Canadian Economy Act (Bill C-5), which promises to expedite approvals for projects deemed 'in the national interest,' provinces have been rushing to position themselves with Prime Minister Mark Carney's cabinet in the hopes their regional initiatives and economic dreams will come true. Ontario has even passed its own version of the federal bill, in what is surely a move to speed up approval for the Ring of Fire critical mineral project despite Indigenous opposition. The challenge for all of this — if you can call it a challenge — has been Canada's legal requirement under Section 35 of the Constitution to attain 'free, prior, and informed consent' when it comes to including and respecting Indigenous and treaty rights. Simply put, few provinces have partnership agreements with First Nations to build economic projects and, for those that do, these were made after lengthy and costly court battles, negotiations, and conflict. The federal bill, Ontario's bill and the 'feasibility' agreement between Alberta, Saskatchewan and Ontario has no First Nations, Métis or Inuit approval. In other words, they are not worth much and are simply a cause for conflict. To be honest, development occurred much quicker when Canada was genocidal. Until the past five decades, Canada never had a legal duty to consult Indigenous peoples on the land, water, the economy, or frankly anything really — so, it didn't. Since the country's founding in 1867 (and arguably before that), Canadian legislators took Indigenous and treaty land, moved people whenever and wherever, and made unilateral decisions on Indigenous lives and families all the time. When law got in the way, other laws were passed under the justification that Canada's national interests were paramount. This meant that swaths of Indian reserve lands were taken whenever a company, corporation, or the military wanted. Or, that masses of Indigenous leaders were imprisoned, Indigenous women were stripped of rights, and children were taken. All this happened blatantly. A few kilometres from where Winnipeggers sit was the St. Peter's Indian Band, whose lands in and around Selkirk were taken illegally in 1907 while the community was removed to what is now Peguis Indian Reserve. The tide started to change in the 1970s, when Canada's Supreme Court recognized that Indigenous title (and therefore law, government, and rights) existed and Canada had to start to act justly, humanely, and with consideration of their humanity. Things were supposed to be different — but old Canadian habits die hard. From the One Canadian Economy Act to the actions of provincial premiers, Canadian leaders continue to act as if Indigenous peoples are an afterthought, using age-old arguments that Canada's 'national interests' are paramount. That is, until Kinew — who has not shied away from interest in lucrative land and resource projects — refused to join his provincial counterparts. 'In other parts of the country with other levels of government, there's the commitment to maybe push things through with legislation first,' Kinew told media, explaining his decision. 'That puts other partners on the back foot.' Don't be confused. When Kinew says 'other partners,' he means First Nations, Inuit, and Métis rights holders. What the premier is doing isn't because he's First Nations, it's because he's trying to follow Canadian law. History has proven it's a tremendous waste of time, money, and energy to exclude Indigenous rights holders from conversations surrounding land, resources, and, frankly, the country. The first and most important 'project in the national interest' is to include Indigenous governments at the outset of every single decision this country makes. Anything else is illegal. An unprecedented step however requires an unprecedented idea. For Kinew, it's a Crown corporation (on par with entities such Manitoba Hydro and Manitoba Public Insurance) that can assemble Indigenous leadership to review and give approval of economic land and resource projects alongside provincial regulators. This 'Crown Indigenous corporation' would require buy-in and unity from Indigenous leadership — and seems to have almost immediately gained it. This week, the Southern Chiefs' Organization and the Manitoba Métis Federation came to an agreement to collectively 'advance economic reconciliation, protect Indigenous rights, and collaborate on major infrastructure and development projects across Manitoba.' That's no coincidence. That's First Nations and Métis holders on the front foot and reserving their spot at the table. Niigaan SinclairColumnist Niigaan Sinclair is Anishinaabe and is a columnist at the Winnipeg Free Press. Read full biography Our newsroom depends on a growing audience of readers to power our journalism. If you are not a paid reader, please consider becoming a subscriber. Our newsroom depends on its audience of readers to power our journalism. Thank you for your support.
Calgary Herald
13 hours ago
- Calgary Herald
Premier Danielle Smith squares off with tense crowd at heated Alberta Next panel in Edmonton
Article content And the exchanges veered away from the constitutional questions, as members of the audience exchanged barbs over health care, the government and the province's recent decision to change its expense disclosure policy. Article content Despite attempts by moderator Bruce McAllister, a former Wildrose MLA, to steer the conversation away from the flashpoints, Smith addressed concerns over the province's plan to require Albertans to pre-register for COVID vaccines and pay for the shots themselves. Article content She said the blame for the COVID shots lies with the feds. She said the feds 'defunded' the immunization program. Article content 'So we had to make a choice about how to best provide those services to those who needed them the most, without wasting $225 million, which is the value of COVID shots that were thrown away over the past three years,' said Smith. 'It's not bulls–t. It's true.' Article content Article content As for the expenses, she said the cabinet will be discussing the change on Tuesday. At the beginning of August, a change was made that takes away the requirement that the premier, ministers and senior staff have to disclose expenditures over $100. Article content Smith said she does not want to hide expenses from the public. She said the spirit of the change was to protect the privacy of officials who don't want the public to find out what hotels they regularly frequent when on the road. She said that she does not support the erasing the expenditures from the public record, and will work to reverse that part of the decision. Article content Moderator McAllister fanned the flames throughout the evening, equating some of the negative commenters to toddlers who don't get what they want. After a show-of-hands poll indicated the majority of those in the audience wanted Alberta to work with other provinces to push for changes to the federal constitution, McAllister said 'thank you to those who are here for the right reasons,' fully breaking the facade of impartiality. Article content Article content After several audience members questioned the motives of the Alberta Next panel, Athabasca-Barrhead-Westlock Glenn van Dijken reiterated the stance that sovereignty and separation don't mean the same thing. Article content 'This doesn't equate to separation, this equates to sovereignty within Canada,' he said. Article content This was the third of a series of Alberta Next meetings scheduled throughout the province, with more than 60,000 people tuning in to the meeting via livestream, the province estimates. The next one is set for Aug. 26 in Fort McMurray. Article content Article content 'It's really just a sham,' said Alberta Civic Integrity Project member Matilda Johnson. 'She (Premier Smith) just does stuff to look like she's getting input, but she also ignores the input when it's given. Obviously, most people don't agree with the idea of an Alberta pension plan, but she's still pushing it.'
