Critics of the government’s grain transportation reform legislation will get their last, futile kick at the can this week as the Senate gives it one last quick look.
The bill is expected to be law by the end of the week.
Before it makes it through the final legislative hoops, however, senators will hear from one more well-known critic.
Arthur Kroeger was hired by the government last year to figure out how to implement a commercial grain transportation system without Canadian Wheat Board involvement. He is expected to tell senators the government’s compromise will not achieve the full potential benefits.
Read Also
Going beyond “Resistant” on crop seed labels
Variety resistance is getting more specific on crop disease pathogens, but that information must be conveyed in a way that actually helps producers make rotation decisions.
Two weeks ago, former Supreme Court chief justice Willard Estey, who started the commercialization ball rolling with a report proposing elimination of the wheat board role in grain movement, told MPs that the government compromise was a “mess.”
The government solution is to move some grain transportation arrangements to a commercial tendering and contract system, while leaving the wheat board in the middle of the action between railways and grain companies.
A third-party monitor will keep track of how well the system is working. The monitor will report to the transport minister and, once a year, to MPs.
In the House of Commons, the compromise had many doubters on both government and opposition sides, but MPs rushed it through mainly because the bill also offers farmers an estimated $178 million annual grain freight rate reduction, beginning Aug. 1. Railway grain revenues will be capped.
The legislation, C-34, passed the House of Commons June 14 and
debate opened in the Senate June 19.
The final Commons debate was a replay of the acrimony that has followed the issue. Transport minister David Collenette defended the government decision to accept only part of the Estey and Kroeger reports.
“It was always assumed that those gentlemen would give us the overall conceptual framework and some ways that the framework could be implemented,” he said.
“However, ultimately it was government and Parliament that had to make the political decisions. We have to make the political tradeoffs.”
Opposition MPs countered that the tradeoffs were poorly made.
Canadian Alliance MP Roy Bailey said he would support the bill to get money to farmers, but it is a bad compromise that leaves the wheat board with too much power.
“Our support for this is for the short-term gain but there is going to be long-term pain,” said the southern Saskatchewan MP.
Conservative Rick Borotsik said his party too would support the bill for the farm help, but also predicted the issue will be back. If Collenette thinks the bill is a good balance, “he is either delusional or is totally under a misconception,” he said.
