Thank you, Mr. Chair.
I was saying that this is to ensure that both the matter and the offer are common. Without sufficient commonality, the group FOA would simply be a series of individual FOAs with little in common. This would be unworkable and unfair to the arbitrator.
Group FOA is a new concept, and will undoubtedly be subject to challenges as the parties seek to clarify what is meant by "a matter being common to all shippers" and "a joint offer, the terms of which apply to all of them". We will have to rely on the good judgment of the Canadian Transportation Agency and the courts. I want to emphasize, however, that this is a remedy that is aimed at helping shippers—it is quick, effective and less costly. There will be practical restrictions on what qualifies as an eligible group FOA to ensure that it be an effective and expedient remedy. However, it is not intended that shippers must be facing exactly the same circumstances in order to be eligible for group FOA.
Under the new group FOA provision, the agency must be satisfied that the members of the group have attempted to mediate the matter with the railway. This is consistent with the government's preference for encouraging commercial solutions before regulatory remedies are pursued.
Bill C-8 permits parties to a single final offer arbitration to suspend the arbitration process by mutual agreement in order to pursue mediation. This provides both parties with an alternative without jeopardizing the shipper's right to final offer arbitration. The FOA process will resume if mediation fails.
Shippers strongly support group final offer arbitration and are eager to see it implemented.
Bill C-8 ensures that the line transfer and discontinuance provisions apply to lines that are transferred to a provincial railway but revert back to the federal railway. This will ensure that interested parties, including governments, have an opportunity to acquire such lines before service is formally terminated. This provision closes a potential loophole.
A complementary provision requires CN or CPR to make payments to local municipalities if a grain-dependent branch line reverts and is subsequently closed. These payments are $10,000 per mile per year over a three-year period.
A new provision requires CN and CPR to maintain and advertise a list of sidings that grain producers use to load their own cars and to give 60 days' notice before closing such sidings.
I also want to speak briefly about the commitment to commence a review of railway service within 30 days of the bill being passed. This commitment has been a priority for shippers and has been well received by them.
The objective will be to focus on solutions to the problems that we have been hearing about for the past year or so. The review may include an assessment of the effectiveness of the level of service provisions of the Canada Transportation Act. We will be looking for innovative solutions to a challenging issue.
Shippers and railways will be consulted on the scope and terms of reference for the review. I expect Transport Canada to contact interested parties for their views later this year.
The government has taken significant steps to address shipper concerns through Bill C-8and the railway service review. Many, if not most of us, have heard serious complaints about railway performance. Shippers have been waiting for these improvements for over five years and are very supportive of Bill C-8. They want this bill passed expeditiously.
For their part, the railways may object to some of the provisions but they want regulatory stability. I believe that Bill C-8 provides this and a better balance between shippers and railways.
We have an opportunity to take corrective action. I encourage members to support Bill C-8. I hope that once the bill is passed, shippers and railways will become re-engaged in discussions on a commercial dispute resolution mechanism.
Thank you very much for your attention.