Farmers and the grain industry once had a keen understanding of the dangers that the monopoly-like railways posed to “market power.”
However, that understanding waned in the decades after the Second World War among those favouring deregulation, Transport Institute analyst Paul Earl told the Fields on Wheels conference Dec. 3.
In fact, concern with railway power almost disappeared in the right-of- centre camp as the anti-CWB monopoly debate grew to a crescendo.
“I don’t remember one serious conversation about market power and the dangers it imposed,” said Earl, a longtime advocate for deregulation and a former researcher for the Western Canadian Wheat Growers Association.
Read Also
Supreme Court gives thumbs-up emoji case the thumbs down
Saskatchewan farmer wanted to appeal the court decision that a thumbs-up emoji served as a signature to a grain delivery contract.
“I was involved for many years, precisely lobbying for deregulation. I fought very hard to deregulate the system because the grain transportation system had done a lot of damage, but I do have to say I do not recall one serious conversation amongst the people who were fighting for deregulation” about the possible power imbalances that could occur if the CWB monopoly was removed.
Earl’s mea culpa was presented as context for the present plethora of regulatory changes, hurried legislation and reviews that have taken on special urgency among farmers and other parts of the grain industry in the wake of the disastrous 2013-14 grain shipping season, which left so many farmers unable to move grain for months.
Farmers suffered financial losses, while the country lost overseas sales and took a hit to its reputation as a reliable supplier of crops.
The federal government’s emergency order-in-council and quickly composed Bill C-30 rules have focused on disciplining the railways for presumed negligence in performing their duties.
However, Earl said railway decision-making in 2013-14 was “rational,” given the almost entirely commercial nature of railway regulations by that point.
“If you create a commercial system, you get commercial decisions,” said Earl.
What now appears to be missing is something to ensure the “social” responsibility of private entities that have great power.
“Society needs a balance between the public and private sectors, and a healthy society cannot function without both, and without a balance between open markets and regulation,” said Earl.
Corporations will operate only for commercial and shareholder interests when allowed to do so, but “when they do, they open themselves to … serious social and economic conflict.”
ed.white@producer.com
