Evidence of meeting #120 for Agriculture and Agri-Food in the 42nd Parliament, 1st Session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was capacity.
A recording is available from Parliament.
10:35 a.m.
Lambton—Kent—Middlesex, CPC
You might even be able to load that oil in the rain. I don't know.
10:35 a.m.
Some hon. members
Oh, oh!
10:35 a.m.
Lambton—Kent—Middlesex, CPC
I'm going to turn it over to my colleague for a question.
November 27th, 2018 / 10:35 a.m.
Conservative
Earl Dreeshen Conservative Red Deer—Mountain View, AB
Thank you.
I guess one of the things that we should find out is just where the regs are, as far as Bill C-49 is concerned. That's always an issue. In order for this to work well, we have to make sure that we recognize that's part of the system as well, the process of making sure those regs are done.
Just quickly perhaps, David, could you talk about the corridors? Where I am, I know that when CN and CP want to ship a lot of grain, they'll take it all out of our spot, which is great, but there are a lot of places in Saskatchewan and northern Alberta that have problems.
10:35 a.m.
Executive Committee Member, Board of Directors, Grain Growers of Canada
I've said this before, but that needs to happen. That's what we need to have. When they're showing their minimums and their maximums, we need it by corridor. That way, it makes for equal shipping. Basically, that's why we wanted to see it, and that's why I mentioned it in my report.
10:35 a.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Pat Finnigan
Thank you, Mr. Bishop.
Mr. Longfield, would you like to say anything?
10:35 a.m.
Liberal
10:35 a.m.
Some hon. members
Oh, oh!
10:35 a.m.
Liberal
Lloyd Longfield Liberal Guelph, ON
Since I have time, I'm still thinking about the northern corridor and the opportunity that Churchill might provide. Is that anything that's being processed through you folks, through any opportunities from canola or from grain handlers?
10:35 a.m.
Policy Manager, Canadian Canola Growers Association
I think that was alluded to this morning by the railway's brief answer to that question. It has nothing to do with the railways and nothing to do with the producers. It has to do with the actual shipper. The line or grain company that is producing that grain, it's their commercial decision if they want to use that railway service to get out there, and then use that third party operator of the port to ship it out.
As you all obviously know, it just recently reopened. It was used under the Wheat Board, pre-2012, but in that new commercial environment, all of those grain companies have their own assets that they own, whether in Thunder Bay, collectively in Prince Rupert or in Vancouver. There's also a bit of a supply chain risk by going up there, and there's just a different way of doing business. Commercially, for the grain shipper, there are some unique circumstances up there that need to be dealt with, and some unique pricing structures. I'm not sure. We don't have any control over that as producers, and the railways move it where the customer wants it to go.
The short answer to your question is that I think time will tell on that one, but I don't think that in the near term it's going to become an outlet for significant volumes.
10:40 a.m.
Liberal
Lloyd Longfield Liberal Guelph, ON
We're just completing a study on what technology is needed to get us to the $75 billion. I have a picture in my head now of all the ports that we have. We also have Hamilton, close to me, and we have the Guelph Junction Railway, which feeds down into that area. We have the changing levels of the Great Lakes, and the port of Hamilton versus the port of Thunder Bay, the capacity issues there.
If we were to take a 30,000-foot, or even higher, view of Canada and our port capacity, which has been mentioned a few times today, that might be something for our committee to think about in a future study, in terms of how our port infrastructure supports what we're discussing here. It might be more for the transport committee, but are there any hot spots that you know of or that you think of from your standpoint, in terms of getting our value-add product to export markets versus continental markets?
10:40 a.m.
Policy Manager, Canadian Canola Growers Association
A quick little footnote to your question is around where the products are actually leaving the country from the port infrastructure. I guess that's one of the legacies of the 2008 global economic meltdown—shipping rates have never gone back to where they were.
I'm sure you've heard this in the past in your studies, but this really changed the nature of global marine shipping and, hence, where our grain is going. What may have been a more balanced east-west Canadian export has gone heavily.... It's a combination of not only the end-buyers but also the freight economics. The basic transport economics has made it so that you can just favourably do moves off the west coast that you might not have done in the early 2000s, just because of the rate differentials in the global shipping market.
10:40 a.m.
Liberal
Lloyd Longfield Liberal Guelph, ON
Climate change plays a role. There are millions of tonnes of grain coming off markets in different parts of the world because of the climate changes in, say, the Middle East or eastern Asia. We have climate change, transportation.... We have a complex network that we're talking about.
I'm really impressed with both of your testimonies this morning. I'm sitting here thinking that we're in really good hands when people like you volunteer your information.
Thank you very much.
10:40 a.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Pat Finnigan
We're saved by the bell. I think we have a vote lining up.
That pretty much wraps it up. I want to thank Mr. Pratte and Mr. Bishop for taking the time to come over and talk to us. Thank you very much.
