The railways should be given a “transition period” lasting until 2013 to find commercial solutions to ongoing rail service problems, says a federal report.
If they fail to do so, then legislation and/or regulations should be implemented to ensure service improves.
The 96 page interim report is the result of a three-and-a-half year process initiated by the federal government in May 2007 in response to years of complaints from shippers about poor rail service.
After months of background studies, a three-member panel was appointed in September 2009 to go through the data and analysis and make recommendations to improve the efficiency, effectiveness and reliability of rail service and provide more transparency for stakeholders.
Read Also
Bio-fumigation may become new use for mustard
Mustard is great on hot dogs, but innovators in Western Canada have developed a new mustard variety for a different market — bio-fumigation.
The report touches on dozens of issues, from timely delivery of rail cars and the adequacy of rail equipment to accountability and running rights.
However, the three-member panel limited itself to eight specific recommendations, among them:
• The railways, in consultation with stakeholders, should develop new commercial measures to improve service.
• Prior to making changes in local service, the railways should consult affected parties and provide at least 10 days advance notice.
• At the request of stakeholders, railways should enter into good faith negotiations to establish service agreements.
• The railways should enter into negotiations to set up better dispute resolution processes with stakeholders, including short line railways.
• Railways should expand and improve confidential and public reporting.
• The federal government should prepare regulatory provisions in the event the 2013 assessment concludes that rail service remains inadequate and be prepared to implement them immediately.
The report noted that while there has been recent improvement in rail service, there is no guarantee those improvements will be permanent changes and they may just reflect an overall reduction in demand for rail service.
It added some stakeholders also feel the review panel’s presence has motivated the railways to be on their best behaviour pending completion of the review.
The report was released Oct. 8, making it difficult to obtain comment from stakeholders by the deadline for this issue.
However, the Western Grain Elevator Association expressed unhappiness with the outcome.
“We are profoundly disappointed in the report,” said association executive director Wade Sobkowich, adding the recommendations amount to taking a ‘wait and see’ approach.
“The report, issued more than two years after the review was announced, amounts to little more than saying we should wait another three to five years before doing anything.”
