ALTO HSR Citizen Research Initiative
Political & Governmental Positions on ALTO High-Speed Rail
Published positions of federal Members of Parliament, Members of Provincial Parliament, and municipal councils on the ALTO HSR project and its proposed southern corridor.
Opposition to the proposed ALTO High-Speed Railway is gaining momentum across Eastern Ontario. The following tables collate published statements and formal council motions from elected representatives at the federal, provincial, and municipal levels. Source data compiled by Save South Frontenac; information current as of April 15, 2026, with additional updates through April 19, 2026.
Opposition Map — Eastern Ontario
Position key:
Opposes Active opposition to the current plan
Concerns Expressed concerns, no formal opposition
Conditional Supports a different configuration or stop
Pending Motion or statement in progress
No Statement No public position as of April 15, 2026
Video — Political Statements
Pierre Poilievre, Leader of the Official Opposition — Statement on ALTO High-Speed Rail, March 31, 2026
Scott Reid, MP (Lanark-Frontenac) — Alto position statement, Feb. 11, 2026
“What’s Alto? It’s worse than a bad idea.”
Bloc Québécois Leader Blanchet in Terrebonne: Bloc would not support Alto if not “respectful for owners of houses and farms along the way.” Mirabel residents push back on planned route. Montréal Gazette / Allen McInnis, Apr. 2026.
Federal — Members of Parliament
| Name / Riding | Position | Statement / Detail |
|---|---|---|
Michael Barrett Leeds-Grenville-Thousand Islands-Rideau Lakes | Opposes | Media release, Feb. 27. Opposes the federal Alto HSR project. |
Yves-François Blanchet Leader, Bloc Québécois — Beloeil—Chambly (QC) | Opposes | Bloc Québécois Leader says the party will not support ALTO if it is not “respectful for owners of houses and farms along the way” and if it bulldozes “usual laws and procedure.” Statements at a Terrebonne news conference and to media, March–April 2026. Blanchet has made ALTO a centrepiece of the Terrebonne federal byelection (April 13, 2026), arguing the Bloc is the right party for voters whether they oppose the project or simply want it done properly with respect for property rights. Cites the Mirabel Airport expropriation — over 97,000 acres of prime Quebec farmland taken in 1969 for an airport later demolished — as a cautionary precedent. Critical of the removal of public hearing rights for expropriated landowners under Bill C-15. iPolitics, April 1, 2026; Montréal Gazette, April 2026. |
Bruce Fanjoy Carleton | No Statement | No formal statement as of April 15, 2026. |
Mark Gerretsen Kingston and the Islands | Concerns | Demands Kingston stop/high-speed rail line as currently configured. News article, Feb. 12. |
Emma Harrison Peterborough | No Statement | No formal statement as of April 15, 2026. |
Shelby Kramp-Neuman Hastings-Lennox & Addington-Tyendinaga | Opposes | Statement released, Feb. 25. |
Philip Lawrence Northumberland-Clarke | Opposes | Formally opposes the project. Facebook post, late March / early April 2026: “Conservatives are calling on the Liberal government to scrap the Alto high-speed rail project.” Cites three objections: (1) cost exceeds the federal deficit, representing nearly $8,000 per family of four; (2) construction wouldn’t start until 2030, first stretch not complete until 2037, and two-thirds of Canadians surveyed say they probably wouldn’t use it even once a year; (3) lack of clarity on the expropriation process — described as the top issue heard from constituents. References the Pickering Airport land expropriation as a cautionary precedent. Concludes: “Nation building projects should make money for Canadians, not take money from Canadians.” |
Pierre Poilievre Leader of the Official Opposition — Battle River—Crowfoot (AB) | Opposes | Calls for cancellation of the ALTO high-speed rail project, describing it as a “boondoggle.” Statement, March 31, 2026. States the only people who will be able to ride ALTO are “wealthy passengers who can afford the costly ticket.” |
Chris Malette Bay of Quinte | Opposes | Withholds support for proposed southern route. Statement released, Feb. 27. |
Scott Reid Lanark-Frontenac | Opposes | “Let’s Stop Alto” — article on representative’s website, Feb. 13. |
Jamie Schmale Haliburton–Kawartha Lakes–Brock | Opposes | Opposes the current ALTO plan on behalf of his constituents. Reflects growing engagement by federal MPs along the Peterborough–Toronto corridor, alongside the City of Kawartha Lakes council vote (April 7, 2026). |
Provincial — Members of Provincial Parliament
| Name / Riding | Position | Statement / Detail |
|---|---|---|
Doug Ford Premier of Ontario | Conditional | Wants high-speed rail built along the Hwy 401 corridor, not the southern route. CTV News, March 16. |
Tyler Allsopp Bay of Quinte | No Statement | No formal statement as of April 15, 2026. |
Ric Bresee Hastings–Lennox & Addington | Concerns | Statement, April 13, 2026. Recognises any new rail service in Eastern Ontario must take into account rural communities and farmers across Hastings–Lennox and Addington and must integrate with existing roads and transit systems. States the federal government “needs to listen to the concerns that I have heard from H-L&A residents about the potential negative impact to farmland and rural properties along the proposed routes.” Supports “considering an alternate route that reflects the concerns we have heard directly from local residents.” Will continue to ensure community voices are heard as planning progresses. |
Steve Clark Leeds-Grenville-Thousand Islands-Rideau Lakes | Opposes | Opposes the proposed southern route. Statement released, Feb. 27. |
George Darouze Carleton | No Statement | No formal statement as of April 15, 2026. |
John Jordan Lanark-Frontenac | No Statement | No formal statement as of April 15, 2026. |
John Jordan Lanark-Frontenac-Kingston | Concerns | Statement, March 31, 2026. Calls on the federal government to listen to concerns from farmers and families about impacts to farmland and recreational areas. Supports considering alternative routes “along the existing infrastructure, that are less disruptive.” States he will continue to ensure community voices are heard as the federal government progresses planning. |
Ted Hsu Kingston and the Islands | Concerns | Statement released, Feb. 13. |
David Piccini Northumberland-Peterborough South | No Statement | No public statement as of April 15, 2026. |
Municipal Councils
| Municipality | Position | Statement / Detail |
|---|---|---|
Township of Addington Highlands | Opposes | Council adopted a formal submission and motion opposing the ALTO HSR project, March 12. Goes beyond route opposition to urge the federal government to “take a step back and rethink the proposal.” Cites corridor bisection of communities, expropriation process changes, and project cost. |
Township of Asphodel-Norwood | Opposes | Council action, week of April 14, 2026. Formally on record opposing the current ALTO HSR plan. |
Township of Beckwith | Opposes | Reeve’s message, March 6. |
City of Belleville | Opposes | Motion passed by council, Feb. 23. |
City of Brockville | Opposes | Amended motion passed by council, March 10. |
Town of Carleton Place | Opposes | Town Hall action, week of April 14, 2026. Formally on record opposing the current ALTO HSR plan. |
Township of Central Frontenac | Opposes | Motion 2026-63 passed by council, Feb. 10. |
Municipality of Centre Hastings | Conditional | Advocates for a Madoc-area high-speed rail station. Article on municipal website, Feb. 3. |
Township of Douro-Dummer | No Statement | No formal statement as of April 15, 2026. |
Township of Drummond/North Elmsley | Opposes | Announcement on municipal website, March 10. |
Township of Elizabethtown-Kitley | Opposes | Council action, week of April 14, 2026. Formally on record opposing the current ALTO HSR plan. |
Township of Faraday | Opposes | Motion passed by council, Feb. 4. |
Town of Greater Napanee | Pending | Council meeting April 14, 2026: draft motion related to ALTO discussed, including a proposed clause of support for ALTO’s Northern Corridor. Council tabled the motion until April 28, 2026 so all members could be present. Clerk noted the Township had received a large volume of constituent correspondence on the motion. |
Township of Havelock-Belmont-Methuen | Opposes | Mayor’s statement, March 2, 2026. Further council action, week of April 14, 2026. |
Township of Lanark Highlands | Opposes | Committee of the Whole passed motion March 10 that the Township does not support the Alto HSR project, and supports reinvestment in existing rail infrastructure. Prompted in part by correspondence from MP Scott Reid. |
City of Kawartha Lakes | Opposes | Council voted April 7, 2026 to formally oppose the ALTO project in its current form. Action reflects growing engagement by communities along the Peterborough–Toronto corridor. |
City of Kingston | Opposes | Joint statement with Township of South Frontenac, March 9. |
Township of Madoc | No Statement | No formal statement as of April 15, 2026. |
Municipality of Marmora and Lake | No Statement | No formal statement as of April 15, 2026. |
Township of Merrickville-Wolford | No Statement | No formal statement as of April 15, 2026. |
Municipality of Mississippi Mills | No Statement | No formal statement as of April 15, 2026. |
Township of North Frontenac | Opposes | Motion passed by council, Feb. 6. |
Township of North Glengarry | Opposes | Council passed motion, week of April 14, 2026. Supports the Eastern Ontario Wardens’ Caucus (EOWC) Resolution 2026-02, which opposes the ALTO HSR project in its current form. Part of growing opposition along the Ottawa–Montréal corridor. |
Township of Otonabee-South Monaghan | No Statement | No formal statement as of April 15, 2026. |
City of Peterborough | Concerns | Notice on municipal website monitoring the project and its implications. |
Town of Perth | Opposes | Motion announced in news article, March 12. |
City of Quinte West | Pending | ALTO resolution was on agenda for March 18 meeting; outcome not confirmed as of April 15, 2026. |
Township of Rideau Lakes | Opposes | Motion passed by council, Feb. 9. |
Town of Smiths Falls | Conditional | Hired a consultant to build a business case for a station in Smiths Falls. March 2026. |
Township of South Frontenac | Opposes | Motion passed by council, Feb. 3. Joint statement with City of Kingston, March 9. |
Township of Stirling-Rawdon | No Statement | No formal statement as of April 15, 2026. |
Township of Stone Mills | Opposes | Motion passed by council, Feb. 9. |
Township of Tay Valley | Opposes | Council passed a motion of “total opposition” to the proposed HSR project through eastern Ontario, March 24. Motion was unanimous; gallery applauded at the close of debate. Reeve Rainer: “The negative consequences are so severe. I just can’t see any benefit.” Resolution to be circulated to the same recipients as the Eastern Ontario Wardens’ Caucus motion. |
The Nation Municipality | Opposes | Council passed motion, week of April 14, 2026. Supports the Eastern Ontario Wardens’ Caucus (EOWC) Resolution 2026-02, which opposes the ALTO HSR project in its current form. Part of growing opposition along the Ottawa–Montréal corridor. |
Municipality of Trent Hills | Opposes | Media release, Feb. 26. Council raises serious concerns regarding the proposed study corridor. |
Municipality of Tweed | Opposes | Council voted against the northern route. Motion states council does not support the project “at this time” and calls for meaningful consultation and detailed information before any further consideration. Mayor DeGenova stated he is personally against the project as a whole. |
Tyendinaga Township | Opposes | Motion passed by council, Feb. 18. |
Source data compiled by Save South Frontenac. Information current as of April 15, 2026, with additional updates through April 19, 2026. This page is maintained by the Alto HSR Citizen Research Initiative.