OTTAWA – The United States should begin to pay more of the costs of St. Lawrence Seaway, MPs complained last week.
Glendon Stewart, president of the seaway authority, told a Commons committee last week that Canada pays 83 percent of the costs of the system while gaining just 47 percent of the benefit of commodity moved.
“That seems inequitable to me,” Ontario Liberal Joe Fontana complained. “I’ll be damned if the Canadian taxpayer is going to subsidize American use of the seaway.”
Along with other Liberals on the transport committee, he wanted to know if the seaway authority has been trying to negotiate a better cost-share arrangement.
Read Also
Ag in Motion speaker highlights need for biosecurity on cattle operations
Ag in Motion highlights need for biosecurity on cattle farms. Government of Saskatchewan provides checklist on what you can do to make your cattle operation more biosecure.
“That is not a popular topic to raise with the Americans,” said Stewart. “I’ll leave it to you to decide on the question of equitability.”
The Americans, rather than charging tolls, fund their portion of the costs by charging a fee on all commodities moved by any system. It raises $200 million annually and has built up a $600-million surplus fund.
The MPs want their government to renegotiate the funding split with the Americans, allowing the seaway to tap into some of those American funds.
Privatization plans
The comments came as Stewart presented a proposal to the committee that would both expand the scope of the seaway authority and give private sector users more of a say in its operations.
Stewart called it “a blueprint for privatization” of the 35-year-old eastern waterway.
He said the short-term impact would be a reduction of operating costs through reduced overlap and fewer staff.
The seaway authority would take over jurisdiction for coast guard services and pilotage services now provided by other agencies.
Meanwhile, during the next six years, job cuts would continue. From a staff of almost 1,000 a few years ago, the authority work force would fall to 600 by the year 2002.
The long-term goal would be a system operated or directed by the private sector.
But the changes would require government legislation and Stewart ran into some heavy weather from MPs when he outlined his option.
He said that by taking over responsibility for coast guard and other services, seaway costs would increase to $130 million annually, despite efficiency savings.
Revenue from seaway users could be no more than $100 million because higher tolls would price the seaway out of the market, he said.
That would leave an annual $30 million deficit in seaway operations.
The numbers did not add up for critical MPs.
Committee chair Stan Keyes found the whole proposal “bewildering”.
Thunder Bay Liberal Joe Comuzzi said the government goal is to create a “self-sufficient” seaway, rather than a system with a built-in annual $30 million deficit.
Reform MP Jim Gouk wanted Stewart to give MPs some hope that if his proposals were adopted, the seaway would one day pay for itself.
“I cannot guarantee it,” said the seaway president.
