Farm and grain industry groups say they’re glad the federal government’s rail freight service review panel is finally getting down to work.
“We’re frustrated at the length of time this has taken but happy to see it finally underway,” said Robert McLean, vice-president of Keystone Agricultural Producers.
“Hopefully it can make some positive recommendations and hopefully the government will move quickly to enact them.”
But those groups are quick to add that the service review is only part of what’s needed to resolve ongoing grain transportation problems.
Read Also
Key actions identified to address canola tariffs
Federal and Saskatchewan governments discuss next steps with industry on Chinese tariffs
The review will examine a range of issues aimed at determining whether the railways are providing adequate service, looking at port operations, rail car delivery, and performance-based penalties and rewards.
What’s also needed, say the farm and grain groups, is a costing review, in which all of the railways’ books would be examined to ensure the freight rates being charged by the rail companies reflect their true costs of moving grain.
The last full costing review was in 1992, with a minor update in 2000, meaning some of the formulas used to calculate costs and rates are more than 15 years old.
“We support a costing review and think it should follow right on the heels of the service review,” said Blair Rutter, executive director of the Western Canadian Wheat Growers Association.
Canadian Wheat Board spokesperson Maureen Fitzhenry said the service review is badly needed, but it’s a huge job and it will be nearly a year before a report is filed.
“We would urge strongly that in the interim a full costing review be carried out by the federal government,” she said.
“It would take a fraction of the time of this review and would ensure that rates are reasonable for everyone.”
The government said it makes no sense to hold a costing review until the service review panel makes its recommendations to Ottawa.
National Farmers Union president Stewart Wells said the federal government is using the service review as a way to delay a costing review.
“It’s a way to distract attention from calls for a full costing review, which should be the first priority,” said Wells.
Rutter said the wheat growers would like to see a fairer system of performance-based penalties and rewards coming out of the service review.
“What we need to see is more balanced and reciprocal penalties for shippers and railways alike,” he said. “It’s one-sided right now in favour of the railways.”
Wade Sobkowich of the Western Grain Elevator Association echoed those comments.
“We want to see substantive changes come out of this, all aimed at rebalancing accountability,” he said.
Ian McCreary, a former CWB director and transportation specialist who farms at Bladworth, Sask., said he hopes the service review panel comes up with a “substantial and rigorous” statement of the problem and a description of how service can be improved.
“That kind of strong statement is needed because politicians haven’t been taking this issue seriously enough.”
He said that could happen if the panel takes the time to talk with shippers directly.
Better service is possible with little more than a change in attitude, especially by CN, he added.
“Canadian Pacific Railways has really changed and improved from the early 2000s and that shows what can be done.”
McCreary said the issue of balanced accountability is high on the priority list for many people because the two national railways have no real competition.
“That results in exactly what you’d expect: poor and expensive service and no process to hold them accountable.”
