How we would love to have that kind of return on capital in the farm community; we don't.
You've said that we should promote efficiency, the lowest possible cost, and the best services. I don't disagree with that point. The problem is that those savings have never been transferred back to the farm community. I mean, you do have a return on capital that is assured to you on your investments. And I can understand why you want to buy hopper cars; if I had that return on capital in my operation, everything I bought with that return in capital would make me money.
Let me put it this way: history has shown that the railways, with increased efficiencies in the system, have never really returned the greatest share of those efficiencies back to the farm community. You haven't; you've returned some, but I am not confident that...and it concerns me.
That brings me to the point about the FRCC, Mr. Chair, which we're here to talk about. I understand that Transport Canada has brought one report to the committee. When can we expect the other two? I understand discussions are taking place with the railways.
We know, as Alex had said, that over the past number of years the railways were charging $4,329 per year for maintenance when the cost was $1,686.
Now, to the railways, can we expect those...I won't use the word “gouged”, but certainly those “excess” maintenance costs, which were applied to the farmers under the cap, to be passed by the railways back to the producers? You've made millions. You've made millions overcharging on maintenance under the cap, and got away with it. Now we're entering a new phase. We want to forget about that old phase where you gouged--I will use that word--the farmers on transport and maintenance costs. Transport Canada let you get away with it.
Can we expect some of those excess maintenance costs to be returned from the railways?