# Canadian railroad bridge in danger of collapse with train on it



## fairviewroad (Jun 27, 2013)

Unfolding situation in Calgary---this is a freight train with no lives immediately at risk, though

some area residents have been evacuated.

Dramatic photo here:

http://www.calgarysun.com/2013/06/27/bonnybrook-rail-bridge-in-southeast-calgary-on-verge-of-collapse

And a "head on" shot here:

http://www.thestar.com/news/canada/2013/06/27/train_derails_on_calgary_bridge_over_swollen_bow_river.html


----------



## DET63 (Jul 1, 2013)

Sounds like there are some bigger (as in long-term) issues coming to the fore. From the _Calgary Sun_ link above:



> Mayor Naheed Nenshi pointed out all city bridges have been checked three times since floods hit Calgary.
> “How is it we don’t have regulatory authority (over CP rail), but it’s my guys risking lives down there to fix it?” said the mayor.
> 
> CP Rail is under federal jurisdiction and the city has no say on how the bridge and tracks are maintained.
> ...


----------



## jis (Jul 1, 2013)

It sometimes seems that Railroads have a way of pissing off everyone they have to deal with


----------



## George Harris (Jul 1, 2013)

DET63 said:


> Sounds like there are some bigger (as in long-term) issues coming to the fore. From the _Calgary Sun_ link above:
> 
> 
> 
> ...


This is called political posturing. It is also setting the groundwork for making a power play to expand his authority. If he is so big on wanting authority over this bridge, then he should open the city checkbook to pay for the replacement and for the maintenance of all the railroad structures in the city he wants authority over. Talk is cheap.

"Itis not the time to be emotional" - - but I am going to be anyway is the act.


----------



## fairviewroad (Jul 2, 2013)

George Harris said:


> DET63 said:
> 
> 
> > Sounds like there are some bigger (as in long-term) issues coming to the fore. From the _Calgary Sun_ link above:
> ...


Of course it's political posturing, but he didn't say he wanted authority over the bridge. He only asked why it's "his guys" (i.e. his city's checkbook)

that have to bail out CP when the crap hits the fan. If CP wants to reimburse the city for the city's expenses, I'm sure the Mayor would be fine with that.


----------



## George Harris (Jul 2, 2013)

fairviewroad said:


> George Harris said:
> 
> 
> > DET63 said:
> ...


Doesn't CP pay property taxes? At least on this side of the border that is considered the way that the city's emergency services are funded. Last I heard, you don't get a bill when you have to call the fire department or the police. You have been paying for these guys already.

The guy is posturing adn what isn't posturing is whining. I have a feeling that CP has been writing checks to the city regularly.


----------



## fairviewroad (Jul 2, 2013)

George Harris said:


> Doesn't CP pay property taxes? At least on this side of the border that is considered the way that the city's emergency services are funded. Last I heard, you don't get a bill when you have to call the fire department or the police. You have been paying for these guys already.
> The guy is posturing adn what isn't posturing is whining. I have a feeling that CP has been writing checks to the city regularly.


Yes, but where I live, at least, the city has the right to regulate my house and property. The city can condemn my property if it

feels it is unsafe. That's part of the social contract that gives me, a taxpayer, the right to expect emergency services. But it

sounds as though CP wants the locally-provided emergency services but doesn't want the local regulatory oversight. I think the

mayor's point was that CP expects to be bailed out when they're in trouble but doesn't want to submit to the kind of oversight

that might have prevented that trouble in the first place.

As to whether CP pays property taxes to the city of Calgary, it sounds like neither one of us knows the answer to that.


----------



## RRUserious (Jul 30, 2013)

Could be way off base on this, but it seems as the world tries to move to more and more efficient modes of transport, a lot of issues come up. Kind of a fight about who foots what bills.


----------



## Nathanael (Aug 3, 2013)

RRUserious said:


> Could be way off base on this, but it seems as the world tries to move to more and more efficient modes of transport, a lot of issues come up. Kind of a fight about who foots what bills.


Private corporate involvement in transportation has caused trouble since the days of "turnpikes" and toll gates for horse-drawn carriages in England. Eventually they were bought out and nationalized.

There are arguments about who foots the bills (local, provincial, national) in other parts of the world, but the crazy system of private, unaccountable railroads deferring maintenance and leaving governments to pick up the pieces seems to be almost entirely a North American thing; the rest of the world got rid of it between 70 and 90 years ago.

If I were the mayor of Calgary, I might just refuse to provide emergency services for CP.


----------



## RRUserious (Aug 3, 2013)

Federalism comes back to haunt all those who thought it the perfect form of government.


----------

