"Crown corporations ==
VIA Rail is a not a true Crown Corporation in that it cannot raise funds on the money market, rather it is subject to the whims of the government of the day for its ongoing funding. This is a major reason for the failure of VIA to improve its lot.

True enough regarding how political control limits the company's ""viability"" (pun intended!), however the definition of a Crown corporation throughout Canada's history has been fairly broad.  In the sense that any publicly owned (ie. government) company in Canada is a Crown corporation, then VIA Rail would meet that criteria.  For many years prior to its recapitalization in the late 1970's and the Canadian railway industry's deregulation in the 1980's, CN was not allowed to raise funds either.  Provincial Crown corporations like B.C. Rail and B.C. Ferries or N.B. Power were similarly limited at certain points in their existence.  I could be wrong, as I have not read the VIA Rail Act in-depth but is there a specific provision which limits the company from seeking funds on the ""money market"" in the way you describe?  I would also argue that there is likely no public transport company in the world which is financially successful in the limited way in which economists in the 20th/21st century measure this.  Since there is no accounting taken for the numbers of vehicles taken off a nation's highways each day, or having to construct new roads to isolated communities served by VIA/Amtrak/etc., or the environmental benefits realized, etc. etc. etc. then VIA Rail, Amtrak, Eurorail, various ferries, etc. will never be financially solvent.  Cheers,  22:00, 31 Jul 2004 (UTC)

The following section was added by User: Andrew Dunning and I have commented it out pending input from others due to several errors:

Officially, the move from the CP to CN line was to keep service to more remote communities on the CN line. However, this move was seen as somewhat more politically-motivated by some. Coincidentally, the CN route goes through more towns that voted Progressive Conservative. Harvey André, the Cabinet minister who represented Calgary in 1990, was fairly public about the fact that he did not care if he never saw a train again in his life. The CN line also went through Edmonton, the home of both Mulroney and Joe Clark.

No doubt politics played a heavy role in this 2nd round of VIA cuts, however I'm unsure as to what the actual political representation played throughout the Super Continental's route (historically, the Super was a CN transcontinental train, and The Canadian was a CP transcontinental train).  In the 1990 cuts when VIA was reduced to a single transcontinental, they decided to keep the more-recognized Canadian brand, and use it on the CN line... why the CN line is the question, however some have suggested CN being a crown corp at the time, gave VIA a better deal on trackage fees, insurance costs, etc. etc.  Politics could also have played a role, or perhaps the thinking was that VIA should be supporting the feds to provide service to the more remote northern prairie communities since the Trans-Canada Highway follows the southerly CP route and was already well-served by inter-city busses.  The main reason I've commented out the above addition was the last line concerning Clark & Mulroney's ridings - Clark represented High River near Calgary, Alberta in the 1980s and Mulroney represented Manicouagan near Baie Comeau, Quebec.  Harvey André...  I have no idea - very likely though.  Once this part gets edited/verified properly, it should appropriately be added to the story surrounding the 2nd round of cuts in 1990. 16:57, 4 Aug 2004 (UTC)

Joe Clark was born and raised in High River, but he represented Yellowhead, a large riding between Edmonton and Jasper, from 1979 to 1993. Mulroney never lived in Alberta, nor was he ever an Alberta MP. 17:30, 4 Aug 2004 (UTC)

Locomotive roster

The roster is a dog's breakfast of past and present with nothing to distinguish between. Use of ""streamline"" to describe ex CPR Budd built stainless steel equipment is a questionable term. This whole section needs some serious work.

 21:33, 25 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Yeah, this is definitely a mess.  Before I put some time in cleaning it up, would anyone like to weigh in as to whether they'd like to see this sort of information in this article?  For Canadian National Railway and Canadian Pacific Railway we've resisted having the roster in the article, but VIA Rail might be different because (a) its locomotive count is in the dozens, not the thousands and (b) it's a bit easier to compile a complete roster since VIA's under 30 years old.  I'm ki