WINNIPEG – Farmers have an influential ally in their fight to secure an equal voice in shaping the new rail car allocation system.
Federal agriculture minister Ralph Goodale said last week he is not persuaded by arguments that the producer representative on the new Car Allocation Policy Group should be denied a vote.
“I would be inclined to believe that if you’re participating in the group, you’re participating in the group,” he told reporters. “There would have to be a very compelling reason why any particular decision would involve some members and not others.”
Read Also
Agriculture ministers agree to AgriStability changes
federal government proposed several months ago to increase the compensation rate from 80 to 90 per cent and double the maximum payment from $3 million to $6 million
However, Goodale stopped short of saying he would direct the interim CAPG to ensure farmers have a vote, since the whole idea behind CAPG is to get government out of the business of grain transportation and let the industry set its own rules.
CAPG is made up of four members, representing the railways, grain handlers, the Canadian Wheat Board and farmers. On Aug. 1 it will take over responsibility for devising the rules for doling out rail cars among grain shippers.
As initially proposed by the grain industry’s senior executive officers committee, the groups would have consisted of three members. But in response to complaints from farm groups, the federal government said in last winter’s budget that a producer representative should be added.
Who gets to vote?
Now a serious disagreement has developed within the interim CAPG over whether the producer representative should have voting rights.
Some corporate interests in the grain industry say there’s no reason farmers should have a say in decisions that will most directly affect the commercial side of the grain transportation sector.
Goodale said he views that argument with “a fair bit of skepticism,” adding it’s important that CAPG be seen as an impartial arbiter.
“For the process to have any credibility or respect among all the stakeholders it must be a transparent process that does not have built into it some administrative or procedural flaws that would undermine its standing in the eyes of the stakeholders.”
Greg Arason, chair of the interim CAPG, has said the group will be unable to resolve the matter and will turn it back to the full committee of senior executive officers.
