The forest industry is part of a larger shippers' coalition, including the grain industry, the chemical industry, the auto industry, the mining industry, and others. We're not looking for additional regulations; we're looking for a dispute settlement mechanism. I can't speak for all the other industry partners in our coalition, but in the forest sector 80% of the mills we represent are in communities at the end of railway lines or in remote regions where there isn't another alternative. While people may debate the proper limits of regulation or whether they believe in competition and free enterprise, when there's only one supplier, what you have is a monopoly. If the trucks are not able to get through the roads, rail is the only way to do it, and if we want to be shipping to China, the railcars need to be there so that we can get to port and get over to our international markets.
It's a matter of timing, of having enough cars, and of making sure the cars are clean enough to put our product in so that they can go to our international customers. We're asking for a mechanism in the act such that when there is a disagreement between the shipper and the rail company, that mechanism would provide a procedure for dispute settlement and an agreement on an acceptable level of service. If you're the monopolist, you can penalize shippers for not putting their product on your railcars, but if the railcars aren't ready for the product, the shipper can't penalize the monopolist. We need a balance in the agreement between the shippers and the rail companies.