Thank you, Mr. Chair.
Thank you, Mark.
Gordon, you're practically a member of the committee, honorary at least.
I have three questions, one to Mark and two to Gordon.
Everyone has expressed concern about the rail service review and the lack of action. We've heard about the damaged cars that are being used and that are hurting the producers and farmers. We know about the late arrival of these cars, and it's a concern to all of us.
Yet we keep hearing that something is forthcoming from the government. We don't know what it is. It's kind of like a cat and mouse game. Maybe Pierre knows when it's coming and hasn't the liberty to tell us yet, but something is necessary.
Could you tell us what your expectations are, after I get through my next two questions?
That's the first question for you: what are your expectations, what do you expect to see in this legislation that will be supposedly coming down?
The second question is with respect to value-added. I was reading an article a couple of weeks ago in the Peace Country Sun—it might have been last week actually—by Alina Konevski, about canola out west, the new seeds, and the new crushers that are being built. I began thinking about how much value-added there really is in the grain industry. We heard that when we were getting rid of the Wheat Board; we heard that this was going to be an opportunity for all these new companies to start up and to start production that they otherwise had been unable to produce and manufacture. For instance, Alliance Grain Traders said they were going to have a pasta plant, and suddenly that evaporated. What's happening in that area?
Thirdly, Gordon, on your page 2, under “Use”, it talks about competitive pricing and diverse revenue streams. One thing that isn't there is getting paid—actually getting paid.
I understand with the proposed amendments in Bill C-45 that bonding will no longer be required and that people can seek third-party industry to make sure they're paid. I see getting paid and bonding as a necessity.
Can you clarify? Will people be required to have security so that they actually do get paid, or will it be some option that they get third-party insurance? I'm concerned that if we give the option, very soon we're going to have people coming before us saying, “We're not getting paid”. I'd like you to clarify that issue.
Mark, can you go ahead first on the rail?