MONTREAL — A coalition opposed to construction of the Lac-Mégantic rail bypass has delivered almost 1,500 letters contesting the Canadian government’s expropriation of land for the project to the agency in charge of the process.
The French-language newspaper La Presse Canadienne initially reported the protest in an article published in English by the Montreal Gazette.
Lawyers for coalition, which describes itself as “collaterial victims” of the bypass plan, hand-delivered the letters to Public Services and Procurement Canada, accompanied by representatives of a group representing Quebec farmers. The ministry said it had received 1,493 letters of contestation.
The opposition means Public Services and Procurement Minister Helena Jaczek will ask Canada’s attorney general to name an investigator to hold a public hearing. The investigator will produce a report based on that hearing within 30 days, after which time Jaczek can continue the expropriation, abandon it, or reduce the number of properties involved.
The expropriation process began Feb. 13 after Transport Minister Omar Alghabra said the bypass project needed to move forward although the government had been unable to negotiate purchases for all needed land [see “Canadian government begans process to acquire land …,” Trains News Wire, Feb. 14, 2023].
The coalition has claimed the new route is more dangerous than the existing line, and has called for an environmental study of the project [see “Lac-Mégantic bypass opponents ask for environmental impact study,” News Wire, March 8, 2023].
The 10th anniversary of the disaster in Lac-Mégantic that killed 47 is approaching in July, and the government had hoped to open the bypass this year. But ongoing opposition in neighboring communities continues to push back the project.
All right, fine. Stop all further actions on the bypass. If the townspeople don’t like that, they can go talk to the landowners (and other agitators mentioned) who put up the fuss to find out why the tracks still run through the center of town. Make them explain it.
Seems to me that two person crews and/or not leaving a disabled train unattended, and strongly enforcing rules about setting hand brakes as well as keeping equipment in good repair could prevent a repeat of that accident.
Seems to me you’ve made a case for two-person crews. As I’ve said all along since this incident.
Also, as I remember, after the locomotive fire was put out, the engineer offered to go back and restart the locomotive to put air back in the line. Maybe he was going to set more handbrakes because he knew he hadn’t set enough. But he was told not to because that would violate hours of service. Notwithstanding that it was his negligence that he wanted to break the HOS rule to correct, sometimes a rule should be broken in order to save lives.
Seems to me that simply placing derails on the staging tracks where the runaway train had been parked would prevent any repeat accident. And then building a short bypass around the town center (5 miles or so) would protect the town itself. Much cheaper, quicker and less controversial than the proposed very extended bypass route.
“a group representing Quebec farmers.”
I can’t help but wonder how many of the signatories on that letter actually own property and/or live along the proposed route or are signing because they are agitators/protesters supporting the cause.
It would be interesting to know why the proposed route is allegedly more dangerous than the existing route.
That’s what I want to know…since it no longer runs through the center of Lac Megantic? Explain that one people, and don’t say because it encroaches on Nantes and Frontenac, both minor municipalities. Both of them combined don’t even make up the size of Lac Megantic, I bet most of those people that live there just have those places for mail purposes only.
It’s not more dangerous … it has lesser grades, has less grade crossings and is away from any population center. This is just classic NIMBY.
The thing is, the new route is getting awfully expensive to build, with many deep cuts, high fills and a bridge. One has to wonder if it is truly necessary, given that the route has been safely operated for nearly a decade, and currently averages a single pair of trains on the line each day (expected to grow to two pairs later this year when NBSR and the port of Saint John complete their upgrades). It will remain a rather low-traffic route for the foreseeable future.
However, this NIMBY may be the perfect excuse to stop this nonsense (or revert to a less ambitious, partial bypass of the western edge of town, keeping the existing bridge and trackage from Megantic eastward.)
After all, many towns and cities are bisected by rail lines that are much busier… will they expect the rails to be relocated at someone else’s expense too?