Just when it appeared that the Farmer Rail Car Coalition’s 10-year-long lobby to buy the federal government’s 12,000 grain hopper cars was won, the deal has been pushed off to the side rails while the Conservative government re-evaluates the deal.
The former Liberal government and
the FRCC reached the agreement on the eve of the last federal election, after a decade of lobbying by several interested parties.
Given the timing of the deal, it makes sense that the Conservatives would want
to ensure the arrangement is in the best interest of farmers and taxpayers.
Read Also
Agriculture needs to prepare for government spending cuts
As government makes necessary cuts to spending, what can be reduced or restructured in the budgets for agriculture?
That’s also why it is important for the government to heed the request of the FRCC and publicly release a confidential report that the coalition says will back up its claims that it can save farmers $30 million per year in maintenance costs compared to what is now being allocated
to the railways.
The FRCC has stated all along that it can maintain the cars for about $1,500 each per year.
The railways receive about $4,500 per car each year from the federal government to cover maintenance costs but actually pay only a fraction of that, according to Sinclair Harrison of the FRCC.
The latest figures available from the Canadian Transportation Agency show that in the crop year 2003-04, the railways received $4,329 per car per year through the revenue cap, which regulates how much railways can earn from grain handling each year.
The disparity between the FRCC’s estimates and the railways’ reported costs point to a need for more scrutiny. The best way to ensure that is to let the public see for itself.
No doubt questions will remain even after release of the study, which was conducted by the Canadian Transportation Agency. Critics will comb through the study for flaws, while supporters will point to the document as proof that the coalition can provide the same service at a fraction
of what the railways receive.
But accountability is key and by throwing the report open for public viewing, the information will have a chance to sink or swim or its own merits.
It is a scenario in which the FRCC thinks it will come out ahead. It has asked Transport Canada to release the document, but at the time this editorial was written on April 17, the government had refused the request.
Unless the Conservative government sees a problem with subjecting its decision-making process to public scrutiny, it is tough to imagine why it would refuse to release the report.
There were concerns that the rail cars had fallen into a state is disrepair in the last 10 years, which could have forced costs higher for the FRCC and rendered its bid unfeasible.
But those fears were dispelled by an investigation last year.
Barring any new discoveries, the FRCC proposal to own a fleet of farmer-owned rail cars makes as much sense now as it did when the Liberals held power.
