Lesson plan

ViaFast

ViaFast (corporately styled VIAFast) was an abandoned passenger rail plan that would have cut Via Rail's trip times throughout the Quebec City–Windsor Corridor. ViaFast did not propose true high-speed service throughout the service area, but a series of smaller upgrades to avoid known bottlenecks and provide improved performance at a fraction of the price of entirely new lines. It aimed to reduce the Toronto–Montreal time by about one hour, to 3.5 hours; halving the Montreal–Quebec City time to 2 hours; and reducing Toronto–Windsor time by an hour, to 3.5 hours. Initially studied in 2002, the plan was announced in the last days of the Jean Chrétien government. During the transition to Paul Martin's leadership, members of both the sitting Liberals and their opposition in the Canadian Alliance expressed concerns about the plan and it was quietly abandoned. Details of the ViaFast plan became known to the public in 2009 when it was leaked to Canwest news services.

Back to article

Article summary

ViaFast (corporately styled VIAFast) was an abandoned passenger rail plan that would have cut Via Rail's trip times throughout the Quebec City–Windsor Corridor. ViaFast did not propose true high-speed service throughout the service area, but a series of smaller upgrades to avoid known bottlenecks and provide improved performance at a fraction of the price of entirely new lines. It aimed to reduce the Toronto–Montreal time by about one hour, to 3.5 hours; halving the Montreal–Quebec City time to 2 hours; and reducing Toronto–Windsor time by an hour, to 3.5 hours. Initially studied in 2002, the plan was announced in the last days of the Jean Chrétien government. During the transition to Paul Martin's leadership, members of both the sitting Liberals and their opposition in the Canadian Alliance expressed concerns about the plan and it was quietly abandoned. Details of the ViaFast plan became known to the public in 2009 when it was leaked to Canwest news services.

Key claims

  1. publication date: 1991 — source: Wikipedia · confidence 0.95

Discussion questions

  1. Summarise the article in your own words. Which single claim would you verify first, and why?
  2. The record states that the publication date is "1991". What evidence would count against this claim?
  3. Which claim in this article is most likely to be revised as the sources update? How would you check its current status?
  4. If two sources disagreed about one of these facts, what would you need in order to trust one over the other?

Bibliography

  1. Wikipedia https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?oldid=1355979342

Key claims and bibliography are generated from the same tracked claims and sources as the article page.