Debates of Feb. 5th, 2014

Grain Transport

[Ralph Goodale, Liberal, Wascana, SK]

Mr. Speaker, not long ago, one of our colleagues in this House resigned to take up a new challenge. That was Merv Tweed, the former member for Brandon, who went off to become the new CEO of OmniTRAX, which has responsibility for the Port of Churchill.

The government has indicated that there are a million or so dollars to be of assistance to Churchill. It would seem to me that somebody should be looking right now at the question while the permafrost in northern Manitoba is still frozen.

Is there the possibility of moving any kind of significant volume of grain by rail to Churchill, to have it in position for the spring shipping season to take some of the pressure off the current situation? Is that one small practical example of some things that might be done, and has anybody spoken to Mr. Tweed?

[Jinny Sims, NDP, Newton—North Delta, BC]

Mr. Speaker, my colleague from Churchill tells me that is one solution. The other solution is to get some additional rail cars in place and let us utilize the Port of Vancouver. Deltaport is available as well.

Let us stop these periods of feast and famine, and let us get the goods moving. What I am hearing over and over again from the transloading companies is about the wait periods and the kinds of penalty they have to pay.

Let us build some accountability into CN so that the penalty is not always one way, which is on to the transloading company.

[Djaouida Sellah, NDP, Saint-Bruno—Saint-Hubert, QC]

Mr. Speaker, when the Conservative government dismantled the Canadian Wheat Board's single-desk system, my NDP colleagues gave many speeches predicting the problems that this would cause.

Once again, this government has a gift for destroying anything that works without thinking of the consequences. The proof is that we are in the House today having an emergency debate, after the fact, about the consequences of the government's ill-considered decision.

We know that the Minister of Agriculture has destroyed our niche market, and that this has resulted in complaints from Japanese and Chinese food companies about quality and service. The farmer-controlled CWB managed the supply chain, from farm to end user.

Would my colleague agree that this government is shirking its responsibilities? We urge the government to resolve this crisis caused by its ill-considered decision. It should not try to hide behind weather conditions.

[Jinny Sims, NDP, Newton—North Delta, BC]

Mr. Speaker, we have a Conservative government that is a majority government. If the Conservatives really had a will to fix this problem, I bet it could be fixed overnight.

We have seen that, when the Conservatives want to move on issues, they can move. They have actually even shut off debate in this House and will move closure motions to get their will put into place.

However, here where we have Canadian farmers hurting and the whole export chain hurting—in a way because of their lack of action, lack of investment in the infrastructure, and lack of accountability that is required in the contracts they have signed with CN—what the Conservatives really need to do is sit down and get to work straightaway.

I believe they can do it. I am pleading with them to do it, for the sake of the farmers and so we do not see good grain going to waste.

[Leon Benoit, Conservative, Vegreville—Wainwright, AB]

Mr. Speaker, I am delighted to be here tonight to take part in this debate. It is very unfortunate that there is a need for us to be here once again discussing slow rail movement. I have been here in Ottawa about 20 years and I have been through this discussion on slow rail movement and problems with rail movement a number of times.

In my life as a farm economist and a farmer before I went into politics, I went through this same situation many times, and I want to say that it hurts. It is hurting farmers now. Many in our caucus are still involved in farms. I am very much involved in a farm. This slow rail movement has hurt me personally in a very serious way. It has hurt the ten farmers, mostly young farmers, who rent land from me on a crop share basis, meaning that I pay part of the expenses and get a part of the crop. Every one of them is being affected in an extremely negative way by the slow rail movement.

The situation certainly is a very negative, unfortunate situation. We would all love to see it solved once and for all. It simply probably never will be, but I know that our government has done a lot of things that will help and have helped, things that have led to really good rail movement over the past few years.

I want to start by talking about the situation.

In western Canada we have a very unusual situation in that 85% of many of the crops we grow are exported. That is extremely unusual. The only other countries that might have a similar situation are Australia and Argentina, but most crops in Australia are grown within 200 miles of the coast, and Argentina as well certainly does not have the kinds of distances that exist in Canada in moving grain to a port so that it can be exported to the world.

In Canada a huge percentage of the crop goes to export. It is our only market. The shipments must travel extremely far, well over 1,000 kilometres, and 1,500 kilometres in some cases. Such distances make this a very unusual situation, and one that is really difficult to deal with.

Railways have been making record shipments of grains and all other commodities over the past few years. In fact, CN is really to be commended up, at least up until the last few months, for increasing its shipments of almost every commodity over the past four years. There was an increase each year over the preceding year. It is to be commended for that. It has done a great job. It has turned what was an average railway into probably the best railway in North America.

However, that does not let it off the hook for what it has not done over December and January, because that has hurt our farmers in an extremely real way and in a very damaging way. It has hurt them because they are not getting the income because their commodity is not moving. It has hurt them even more because the situation has driven prices down quite dramatically. I would argue that some of the grain companies are taking unfair advantage of that situation: they know this grain is not being moved to the coast, so they are paying less than they otherwise would if grain movement was better. That is a huge problem.

In fact, one of the young farmers who rents land from me called me tonight after this debate started. He said that he had phoned a couple of grain companies today to price some of the wheat he has to sell. He received an offer for April of $5.35. This is soft white wheat, so it is the least expensive type of wheat and is usually used for ethanol. In today's conditions, that price is not too bad.

That was a shipper 20 miles west of his farm in Saskatchewan. However, 20 miles south of his farm, the price offered was $3.50 a bushel. He told the guy he had been offered $5.35 just 20 miles west and asked why the guy was only offering $3.50. He was told it was because management had told them not to offer any more because farmers were going to be desperate and some of them were going to take it.

If that is happening, those grain companies are dealing unfairly. In a normal marketplace, I would say that it is the market, but it is not a normal marketplace when farmers and grain companies are held captive to a railway. I say “a” railway because in most cases farmers only have one option. They can choose either the CN line or the CP line that runs near their farm. They really only have one option.

It is not a free market, and that allows things to happen that really should not. That is why there is a place for government to be involved. The minister has been very much involved. He has been involved in this for months now. We knew mid-summer that we were going to have a huge grain crop. The minister started working with all of the parties involved back then. Clearly the railways did well in the first couple of months of the crop year, early in the harvest. I do not have the exact numbers for December and January, but I know that shipments have been way off, and the minister has been working on that.

The members across the floor talk about the five-year plan to fix the system. Quite frankly, that is a long-term plan. The minister has been working on a short-term plan as well. I am confident that we will have results from that. It is too slow for me. It is too slow for other farmers. However, it is certainly the best that we could expect.

I would argue that the Minister of Agriculture is absolutely the best that this country has had in decades, and I do not say this only because I am a Conservative member of Parliament. He is on top of these things. He is working for farmers. He is opening up new markets for farmers, which is extremely important, particularly with the huge increase in crops we are growing. We saw that this year, and I think we will see it for years into the future. The minister is doing an excellent job.

Having said that, I encourage farmers to continue to push the railways, the grain companies, the ports, and the government, to do more, and to do it more quickly, because what is happening now is completely unacceptable.

I am not here tonight because we are talking about an issue that is near and dear to my heart. I am here for this one thing that I have to do. It is really rich to me when I hear the members across the floor in the House complaining about slow rail delivery. Some have even complained about the increase in delivery of crude oil by rail. It is true that this has tripled just in the last couple of years. In fact, it may have tripled this year over last year. The members are complaining about that at the same time that they are doing everything to block new pipelines from being built. They should take some of the blame for this situation, and there is no way around that. They are blocking the pipelines. If oil is not being moved by pipelines, it is going to be moved by rail.

Rail is competing with grain movement and that is a problem, although I do want to give the railways credit for increasing delivery on all commodities until this last couple of months. They have to get their game together. CN has done a great job over the last four years. CP is starting to get it together, and that is encouraging. We, who move commodities so far in this country, really do depend on the railways to get our bulk commodities to market. There is no other choice. I would like the members across the floor to give that some serious consideration.

How bad are things? I have already explained an example about one of the farmers who rents land from me, and that kind of tells the story.

Some of the members try to talk about ending the Wheat Board monopoly. The Wheat Board is still there. Farmers can still ship to the Wheat Board. Some try to say that ending the Wheat Board monopoly has somehow exacerbated the situation. It is just the opposite.

I have watched these problems over the years, first as a young lad who grew up on a farm, then as a farmer and a farm economist working with farmers on marketing. This is not anything new, but it does not make it any easier.

How bad is it? It is bad. It is a problem, and it is depressing prices. What I am most concerned about is how bad it is going to be in March and April, as farmers are planning what to grow next year and the bins are still full.

I have wheat, oats, and even canola in long, white bags out on the ground. I even have canola in bags because I cannot move it. It is a huge problem. What am I going to do? More importantly, what are the farmers who farm my land going to do? I just get a third of the crop. They get two-thirds. I pay one-third of the expenses. They pay two-thirds. What are they going to do as they move up to seeding time? They are facing a huge problem, especially when they talk to the grain companies and the grain companies say they cannot contract this year's crop until next fall. Not only may the bins still be full, but a lot of farmers are not even sure they are going to have the temporary storage emptied by that time. That can lead to an awful lot of problems. That is how bad things are. It is extremely bad, and that is why it has to be dealt with.

However, I do give the Minister of Agriculture a lot of credit for what he has done, and I give my colleagues a lot of credit. We have dozens, I do not know how many exactly, of members of Parliament on this side who represent rural areas. We represent most of the rural areas in the country. There is a reason for that. We understand farmers. Many of us either are or have been farmers, so we understand them. Of course we are not going to let things go bad for farmers. We are going to do everything we can to make things better and do it as quickly as we can, not only because we have a vested interest but also because our neighbours and friends are farmers. Our constituents are farmers. We are doing all we can, and I do think we have done quite a bit.

Back in about mid-August, the Prince Rupert Port Authority had a meeting in Edmonton to which I was invited and which I attended. I talked to top people from CN Rail and the Port of Prince Rupert. The Port of Vancouver had representatives there too. I talked to representatives of some grain companies that handle this grain. I told them all that we were going to have a huge, record crop this year. I asked them if they were going to be able to move it, and they all assured me that they would.

Quite frankly, they have not delivered. I am bitterly disappointed that they have not delivered. The Minister of Agriculture is in the process right now of getting the real answers as to why they have not delivered and is strongly encouraging and pushing the railways, the grain companies, and the ports to turn that around.

One of our members earlier talked about the Port of Churchill and was complaining about what is happening there. The Port of Churchill is actually one of the bright spots. Grain movement last year in Churchill was 51% higher than the year before, so it is one of the bright spots, although grain movement has been increasing year over year. CN has been doing its job and CP is getting a lot better as well. There is some hope. The capability is there. The railways and the port authorities assured me that this can happen. CN, of course, is increasing capacity by getting more locomotives and by more double tracking, which is a key part of what makes things move faster. CP is starting to move in that direction too, but I would argue they are a lot slower.

What are the solutions? I wish I could say we could take that big stick that some of the members across the floor were talking about and have things fixed next week. Well, I agree that maybe a big stick is necessary, but I still do not think we are going to have things fixed by next week. It is going to take some time. My hope is that over this next month there can be huge, record rail movement and that we can at least see a light at the end of the tunnel and that the light will not be a locomotive coming through the tunnel with no grain on the train. Anyway, that is a little convoluted, but it is late at night.

My hope is that next month and the month after that, we will see record movement and catch up on some of what did not happen in December and January.

The railways and grain companies have not been performing, and that is not acceptable. What has our government done over the past few years to help prevent a situation like this? We cannot prevent it: we do not run the railways or the grain companies; we do not own the railways or the grain companies.

I believe a New Democratic member suggested earlier that the government should buy the railways and control them. To be fair, I might have misunderstood, but that is what it sounded like. I do not believe the NDP would propose that because it is outdated, something for the last century. I hope I did not misunderstand what the member was proposing.

That is clearly not the solution. The private sector is involved but the government does have a role to play. The federal government regulates the rail industry in this country, and rightfully so. That is the lever we have. That is the big stick.

I hope by some strong negotiations, by some quick discovery as to what the real problems are, that we can move this along and be in a much better situation a month from now and in the month after that, so that farmers can at least go into seeding with a good handle on what will happen. They can then base their seeding decisions on that. Some people who do not understand the farming business at all have asked me why farmers would seed a crop if they are not going to make a profit next year and their bins are full.

I talk to constituents on a regular basis. The young fellow who phoned me tonight said that he had pencilled it out and is going to lose money next year on his grain. Does that mean he should not seed a crop? No, because he has to cash flow payments on his land and equipment, even if he does not seed a crop. These are huge payments, so he has to seed a crop. With the way things look now the best he can hope for is to minimize his losses. In business that is one of the toughest things to learn. It is tough to acknowledge a loss. Sometimes that loss can be minimized, but take it and get out the best way possible. In agriculture, who knows?

Next summer farmers can see what is happening around the world. Prices could be up again, but perhaps not like they were last year. Farmers could be in a much better situation, but that is unpredictable. I am not going to stand here tonight and say it is going to happen, but it is a possibility. In the meantime, we need the grain to move. We need more certainty so that farmers seeding a crop can at least know what they are facing. That is absolutely critical. That is why our government has been working so hard on this.

In June 2013 we passed the Fair Rail Freight Service Act. That legislation gives shippers the ability to deal with a railway company that is not performing. Am I going to stand here and say that it is working for grain farmers right now? No, I am not. It is not working the way it should be working and we have to fix that. Things are obviously not perfect, so we have to fix that.

It was a very important change that we made that has helped a lot of sectors, and it will help the grain sector in the future. But it does not solve this problem; it has not prevented this problem. We will see. Maybe grain companies can use this. Maybe farmers can use this to help deal with the situation, but I am not counting on that.

I see that my time is almost up. I have rambled a bit here tonight but I am summarizing some of the things that are important after having listened to the debate tonight. I do want to give farmers some hope. I do believe that a month from now, and two months from now, things will be better than they are now. That would be a positive situation for farmers.

I will be meeting with two groups of farmers on this exact issue this weekend. The meetings have grown from two to three farmers to more than 10 in each group. They are going to give me some advice, which I will take to the agriculture minister. My colleagues are doing the same. I look forward to some good things happening in the next few weeks.

[Malcolm Allen, NDP, Welland, ON]

Mr. Speaker, I want to thank my colleague and friend across the way for his knowledgeable and heartfelt story about not just his farm and the young folks who work his farm but what farmers are feeling. He articulated extremely well what the effect is of what is happening out there.

A lot of statistics have been thrown about back and forth as to whether the rail companies did better in the first quarter of last year's harvest versus other times. There is a famous saying, “Figures don't lie, but liars figure”. That is not about anyone here in particular who is suggesting that. It is simply an old saying that the Scots use in the sense that we can make a penny a threepence if we want. Let me say this. There were 7.4 million tonnes exported in the first quarter of this crop year. We look back five years; we kind of get stuck on the five-year piece. In 1994, 8.7 million tonnes were exported. That is a fact. Therefore, we can look back and say that they did better in that quarter versus some other times.

My colleague across the way talked about the stick, and I surely suggested the stick of regulation. Perhaps we should look at it. Let me point to a regulation that my colleagues down the way took away. At one point in time there was a $720 million subsidy for the rail companies. When they did not behave themselves, the threat from the government was that it would take some of that away. That became a stick. It never took any of it away, but it was there. I see some heads nodding. It was under the Western Grain Transportation Act, which was in place between 1984 and 1995. The federal government subsidized private grain shipments by about $720 million. If a government has that stick, that is the stick to use. However, the government does not have that stick anymore. Does it want a new one to play with? That is what I am suggesting.

[Leon Benoit, Conservative, Vegreville—Wainwright, AB]

Mr. Speaker, it is a legitimate question. I do not think that threats to the railways and the grain companies are the way to go. Right now we want to talk with them and find out what the real problem is, tell them we need quick action and give encouragement for now. However, if that does not work, then we will have to look at all options down the road.

Let us take it one step at a time. We all know it is much better to deal with things in a collaborative way. That is certainly the approach we have been taking. That does not mean we are not pushing, because we are.

[Wayne Easter, Liberal, Malpeque, PE]

Mr. Speaker, I too know that the remarks from the member from Vegreville were heartfelt, and I know the impact on the farming community. We may disagree on the Canadian Wheat Board. His government really killed the only entity that had the authority and the power to challenge the railways and the grain companies, which was the Canadian Wheat Board; but we will set that aside.

I want to ask the member if he would consider some of these solutions. I would like to outline about five of them. The member for Wascana named a few earlier.

One is certainly doing what can be done immediately, while there is still permafrost in the ground, to get grain movement to the Port of Churchill so it can go from there.

The member for Wascana mentioned making the definition of “service” explicit in the Fair Rail Freight Service Act and making penalties under the law and applying them against the railways, which would compensate for liquidated damages and pay them to the farmers rather than having a fine paid to the government.

I would also suggest that the government re-establish the B.C. Clearance Association, which the government killed in August of 2012. That association was responsible for coordinated ships coming into port six weeks in advance of the delivery of grain to port. That needs to be considered.

The government needs to learn from the logistics operations of the Canadian Wheat Board with respect to collecting the grain inland in a coordinated way and targeting it into the hulls of ships in Vancouver.

Last, would the government consider a grain transportation authority with some power to take charge and, if necessary, order certain things to happen with the grain companies and the railways?

Those are some proposals.

[Leon Benoit, Conservative, Vegreville—Wainwright, AB]

Mr. Speaker, I really appreciate the member giving some specific proposals. I do not feel I can stand here and give definite answers, but I will say this. It is very clear to me and my colleagues that we will consider anything that will fix this problem quickly now and help to keep things operating better in the years ahead, anything except putting in some kind of a structure like the Wheat Board, which interfered. It did not help.

The Wheat Board monopoly interfered in the movement of grain, there is no doubt about that. We could never find out who was causing the problem because we had another player in there and there was just one more person to point the finger of blame at others. It simply did not work, it did not help, and it will not help in the future.

I am hoping that the new Wheat Board, which is not a monopoly any more and competes with other grain companies, can become a big part of the solution over the next couple of years. I am somewhat confident, as is the Minister of Agriculture and Agri-Food, from what I understand, that in fact it can. The Wheat Board is still there, a Wheat Board that will have to compete, but that will be an important part of the solution in the years ahead. So I am looking forward to that.

[LaVar Payne, Conservative, Medicine Hat, AB]

Mr. Speaker, I appreciate the opportunity to ask my colleague a question.

He is absolutely right. Many of our colleagues on this side of the House do represent farmers. In fact, I am privileged to represent a large agricultural area in the MD of Taber, the County of Newell, the County of Cypress, and the County of Forty Mile. There are farmers all throughout this area, and they know that we do in fact stand up for them.

Dennis Thiessen, director of Grain Growers of Canada, said this week:

We want to thank [the Minister of Agriculture] for continuing to recognize the rail capacity needs of grain farmers and the urgency of the current situation.... [The government's] recommendations make sense and they are needed at this time. Improving the frequency of reporting and better communication with industry, railways, government and farmers at the table is what is needed to get the grain moving.

My question for my colleague has to do with the Wheat Board. Liberal and NDP members are saying that the Wheat Board was so fantastic, yet farmers throughout my riding complained about the Wheat Board. They would take their grain and it might take them a couple of years to get their money. I wonder if my colleague could comment on that.

[Leon Benoit, Conservative, Vegreville—Wainwright, AB]

Mr. Speaker, I appreciate that excellent question by my colleague, as he is certainly familiar with farming. He understands the industry and it is an extremely important question.

The reality is that this was a monopoly Wheat Board, and monopolies just do not work. I had professor in my third year of university teach me my first marketing course and explain why a monopoly would never work, and a government monopoly is the worst kind, which is what the Wheat Board was. It was put in place, for Pete's sake, under the War Measures Act to get cheap grain from farmers. It was not to get more money for farmers; it was to get cheap grain from farmers for the war effort in 1942-43. That is when it was put in place. Then they forgot to get rid of the monopoly. We had to do it, and we finally did.

However, the other thing the opposition members forget about when it comes to the Wheat Board is that farmers did not receive all of their money until more than a year after the time they shipped the grain. How does that help farmers? How is that going to help in a situation like this? It took up to a year and a half sometimes, from the time farmers shipped the grain until the time they get their final payment. That simply does not work.

Farmers still have the option. They can use the Wheat Board if they choose. It is their choice, nothing is forced on them. As I said, I am really starting to see a competitive Wheat Board as one that will help farmers in the years ahead.

[Carol Hughes, NDP, Algoma—Manitoulin—Kapuskasing, ON]

Mr. Speaker, here we are again debating one of the many issues in which the federal government has lacked leadership. The Conservatives try to make Canadians believe they are good economic managers but they have continued to sweep things under the carpet or turned a blind eye until a crisis occurs.

On this particular file, it is extremely disconcerting that the Conservative government eliminated the Canadian Wheat Board without ensuring that there would be an efficient plan for grain transportation. It did not make this a priority.

In the past, wheat farmers could depend on the Canadian Wheat Board to fight and to put pressure on the rail companies to get the grain to market. When the board had a monopoly on selling grain overseas, it also held considerable market influence. In a system that has to move around 400,000 grain cars in a year, there is absolutely no room for error or a shortfall when grain shipments are waiting at a cost of thousands of dollars a day, a cost that is ultimately paid by farmers through a lower price for their product.

The Minister of Agriculture and Agri-Food commented last month that in his opinion the railways were doing an adequate job of moving crops to market. However, thousands of farmers, agricultural experts, and newspapers across western Canada are instead pointing to deep and fundamental flaws with the grain transportation system after the loss of the Canadian Wheat Board.

Now the Minister of Agriculture and Agri-Food is suggesting that farmers apply for advances and proposes a five-year investigation into the source of the problem. However, Canada's grain producers have bills and loans that are due now. The government must take action to get the railways moving.

The lack of leadership from the Conservative government with respect to grain farmers will mean that farmers will likely continue to see lengthy delays and backlogs in rail transport that will prevent thousands of western grain producers from getting their products to market. On this side of the House, we fully understand the frustration of western farmers.

It is not just the grain farmers who are frustrated with the government's lack of leadership when it comes to rail. Let us look at the frustration being felt by the residents of Oba, the tourist lodges, businesses, municipalities, and economic development offices, from Hearst to Sault Ste. Marie, because of the Conservative government's ill-thought-out decision to cut approximately $2.2 million in subsidy to CN for passenger service on the ACR line. This is the Algoma Central Railroad line, which recently saw CN announce that without the subsidy it could not continue to maintain the current passenger service. CN told the people around January 24 that the service would end as of March 31. This has also raised concerns that the freight service may also be at risk.

Again, when we are looking at the wheat farmers, they are concerned about their freight services, as these people are as well.

Particular to the ACR passenger service, let us look at the short-sightedness of the Conservative government. It is obvious that, just like the wheat farmers, the government never considered the economic impact of its ill-thought-out decision, nor did it care to consider that it would basically leave the residents of Oba stranded. They only have access to train passenger rail or an industrial road, which at times is impassable and is around a two-hour drive to Hearst, if they can take it.

I forgot to mention that I will be splitting my time with the member for Vaudreuil--Soulanges.

On that note, when it comes to rail transportation, the government's action on this file reminds me of a similar situation that occurred last year with respect to another mode of transportation, the Chi-Cheemaun Ferry on Manitoulin Island. It became a showdown between the government and the province. The impact on tourism was quite great for Manitoulin Island. Although the ferry ended up running, there was a delay in the tourist season for some of them. People cancelled because they could not rely on the ferry.

Now the government is choosing to attack the economy of northern Ontario again, especially the tourism economy, from Sault Ste. Marie to Wawa to Hearst.

I will read something from Tatnall Camp. I have had massive emails on this, and it is all about rail. Whether it is freight or passenger, I think it is important for us to raise the issues here in the House.

This is about Tatnall Camp. Cindy Lebrun and her family have written. They are very concerned, because March 31 is coming up very quickly. They are afraid that their tourist resort will be severely impacted, as 98% to 100% of their business depends on rail. They say:

The vast majority of our guests are railroad travellers that would never want to fly. 100% of our freight arrives by railroad.

She goes on to say:

If this train goes under, our business and all of our investments both past and present will be gone. To hear this news is completely devastating and lacks any Federal promise for our future and also the economic boost businesses like ours provide to the local communities nearby over the long term. My brother and I are one of only a handful of up and coming entrepreneurs under 35 years old in the community of Wawa, and we have a one of a kind train-in destination product that will continue to sell as long as the railroad is here.

Just as we are trying to entice young farmers to take on farming, these are young entrepreneurs who are looking at the tourist industry. They are relying on rail for their business, and all of a sudden, things are being ripped out from under them.

She goes on to say:

We are not the only train-in business on Oba Lake and there are numerous other interests who are served by this railroad (cottage owners, trappers, local citizens, other tourist Camps, canoeists)

Municipalities are also going to be affected. There is a big ripple effect. Let us not forget that some of the effect happening because of the removal of the subsidy by the government, which is a mere $2.2 million, is also impacting the Conservative riding of Sault Ste. Marie. I hope that the government is going to look at the need to find that financing to give back to CN to put that passenger rail back in place so that it does not end.

The other thing is that the government actually invested in a revamp of passenger cars just recently. Now it is saying, “Sorry, no more cigars”.

The letter goes on to say:

...we have an increased number of reserved and confirmed guests and this upcoming season is looking even better than the last....

Our reservations are completely in jeopardy as well as our ongoing marketing investments.

They have been marketing for quite some time. Given the fact that the dollar has now gone down to about 90¢, it was going to be a prime time for them.

I have another letter from Betty, who talks about the impact:

How many FEET of track would this maintain in southern Ontario [for this amount of money] and yet it was sufficient to maintain over 300 miles of track in the north.... Where was the consultation with those directly impacted by such a decision, before they potentially remove their business livelihood.

When we are looking at the particular situation we are talking about today, we see that the government has no national strategy when it comes to rail, whether it be freight or transportation, and none at all for the short term or long term, not for farmers, not for passengers, not for tourists, not for jobs, and not for the economy.

On that note, I just want to reiterate the request we are making. What we want is increased pressure on rail companies, including through the implementation and enforcement of rail performance standards. We want the government to ensure that export and vessel information is accessible to producers, that grain producers have fair access to rail infrastructure to move their product, and that a strategy for future rail service that accounts for sustained agricultural growth is developed. That is on the agricultural piece.

On the passenger side, I think the government has to be really serious to divest our economy for tourism, for municipalities, and for Canadians as a whole. I would ask that the government find the money to reinstate the ACR line as well.

[LaVar Payne, Conservative, Medicine Hat, AB]

Mr. Speaker, that was a 10-minute speech, and nine minutes of it was not about farmers and moving grain. Amazing.

In that regard, I am wondering if my colleague on the opposite side would like to know that this is a debate on grain transportation. As a government, we have really moved forward the opportunity for farmers to have a marketing system they can manage themselves.

Wheat sales contribute $9 billion to the economy and $5 billion to export sales. We are moving to make sure that we open markets for western wheat and barley. The minister is currently working with the grain companies, the railways, and farm producers to try to find a solution to this problem. It is a major problem for the farmers in my area as well.

In that regard, I am wondering if the member opposite would make sure that she talks to her colleagues in the union at CN to make sure that they actually sign an agreement so that grain will, in fact, be shipped by CN without disruption to our farmers, who desperately need to get this grain to market.

[Carol Hughes, NDP, Algoma—Manitoulin—Kapuskasing, ON]

Mr. Speaker, there is a lot to his questions. I will start with the fact that whether it is farmers, passengers, or tourists, it is all the same. We need a government that can act.

Let us see how it acted. This is a government that wasted $50 million building things like gazebos in a southern riding. This is a government that spent $2 billion to host the G8 meetings in Toronto, when they it could have hosted it for a fraction of that cost in a more secure location. It is wasting tons of money and not doing enough to help farmers.

I have an article that states:

Doug Chorney, president of Manitoba's Keystone Agricultural Producers, called on Ottawa to act sooner rather than later to fix the bottleneck. In a recent opinion piece, Chorney laid the blame on “abysmal service” by Canada's two major railways.

It says the duopoly Canadian Pacific Railway and Canadian National Railway have in the marketplace allows them to provide inadequate service without fear of consequences.

Again, we have a government that refuses to act.

On the CN piece with respect to the strike, I can say—

[The Acting Speaker, Conservative, Bruce Stanton]

We are running out of time. The five minutes runs down pretty quickly.

Questions and comments, the hon. member for Malpeque.

[Wayne Easter, Liberal, Malpeque, PE]

Mr. Speaker, I will take the opportunity, in asking a question, to outline another problem. The Conservative member said that the minister is trying to find solutions. However, I think it needs to be noted that the minister was in fact part of the catalyst for problem that we now have, by changing a system without implementing the required protections for producers and implementing some other authorities that could challenge both the railways and grain companies.

There is another problem that farmers have as well right now with grain companies. A lot of the comments tonight have been against the railways, but the fact of the matter is that the railways, in the port of Vancouver, now have to break up their cars and actually move the cars, whereas previously with the wheat board they were able to move a paper allocation between companies, which created greater efficiencies.

Does the member not see the way the grain companies are operating at port position as a problem as well, creating inefficiencies and complicating things even further for the railways?

[Carol Hughes, NDP, Algoma—Manitoulin—Kapuskasing, ON]

Mr. Speaker, a variety of questions were asked.

Together we can strengthen rail services so that producers and shippers can finally enjoy fair and reliable freight services. This is key to being able to resolve some of the issues.

Earlier I raised some points about other things we were asking for that would go a long way in helping to resolve this matter. I will go back to the CN strike. The Minister of Labour was quoted in the newspaper saying that the government was looking at back-to-work legislation and talked about the impact a strike would have on businesses. All I would say to the government is that $2.2 million for the ACR line would go a long way in protecting all of the tourism business along that line in northern Ontario.

[Jamie Nicholls, NDP, Vaudreuil—Soulanges, QC]

Mr. Speaker, it appears that I have the bedtime story slot in tonight's emergency debate, so I will get right to it.

There is a grain farmer out in Hanley, Saskatchewan, tonight who cannot get to sleep. Let us call this farmer Ryan. He is tossing and turning in his bed because he is worried that he is not going to get his commodity to market. He is not the only one. There are farmers all over Rosedale who are worrying tonight.

It has been a cold winter—colder than Mars, some say. All Canadians know that cold winters mean big heating bills, so Ryan is worried about the bottom line. He is not only worried about getting his crop to market; he is also worried about the bottom line. He is worried about the heating bill and all the bills he has to pay. He is worried about his credit cards.

Ryan and his wife and family have been on that land for several generations now, so they know that land. They invested their money this year to expand their grain drying capacity. They put the money in, and they expected and hoped that the system would function so they could get their product out and export it and get their money.

Ryan is in bed tonight. He knows that his three kids are growing up. They are getting older, and soon he will have to send them to the city to go to school, which will be more cost.

He is adding it all up in his head tonight, and he is thinking about all of these figures and the money going out and not coming in because he cannot move his product, because of the backlog. This backlog could turn a bumper year into a bust year for Ryan.

Members from the other side know that guys like Ryan are the backbone of the Prairies. They work to the advantage of Canada and they feed us. Ryan knows where the problems of the backlog started. He is the expert in all of this, not any of us in this room. It is Ryan who has been working the land from year to year and from generation to generation. His family knows.

To begin with, one of the problems is the monopoly of the railways and their willing partners in government to protect this monopoly and its privileges. That is part of the problem. About 30 years of deregulations have led to this logistical mess. No, we are not going to solve it in the next 24 or 48 hours, because it is the product of 30 years of deregulation.

Ryan has heard 30 years of promises. He has listened to his dad grumble about different governments, the Liberals, Reform, Alliance, and Conservatives. He has even heard his grandfathers grumble about the CCF. No one here has their hands clean. We are all responsible for taking care of Ryan and his family, and other families like his.

Ryan's MP in the 1990s was not even a farmer. He was a lawyer. When he sat in this place, he did not represent farmers' interests. He helped CN to privatize and was beaten in the 1997 election as a consequence. Ryan's dad hoped that the Reform Party of Canada would improve things. It is part of the reason that Ryan, when he got to voting age, voted Conservative. However, he now knows that these Conservatives are the same as the Liberals were 20 or 30 years ago. He sees his member sit behind the Prime Minister and he realizes that she is more of a banker than a farmer. Otherwise, she would do something for him. He knows that his member is a good person, but he is disappointed in her.

Ryan believed that the government was going to take care of this problem with the Fair Rail Freight Service Act that was passed last year, but he now knows that it will not, because on TV tonight he heard Norm Hall, the president of the Agricultural Producers Association of Saskatchewan, say that the Fair Rail Freight Service Act passed by the Conservative government was not working and should be amended. That is what we said. That is what I said in this chamber, back in May. Ryan turned off the TV and he rubbed his forehead, which is what any Canadian would do when he realizes that he is hearing another broken promise.

I doubt that Ryan will be voting Conservative next time. Norm Hall has suggestions for amending this problem and solving it. He said that the incentives for grain companies and railways to voluntarily negotiate shipping service agreements have not worked and that we need to put responsibility on the railroads. If there is inaction, there need to be penalties. The government needs to penalize the railway companies when they are not responding to the incentives that the government has put forward.

A review of the legislation of the Fair Rail Freight Service Act is up for 2015. Another member in the House, from the government party, suggested that we move up the review to this year, perhaps, to see what the problems were. We said back in May that there were problems, and those suggestions fell on deaf ears.

It is good to hear that government members tonight are saying maybe we should move up this review process earlier than 2015. When CN privatized in 1995 through the Liberal government's CN Commercialization Act, it had clause 16 that stated more or less that the railway and other transportation works in Canada of CN and all corporations associated, any corporation that evolves out of CN, are declared to be “works for the general advantage of Canada”.

Grain farmers like Ryan work for the general advantage of Canada as well, and it is time government stepped up to the plate for guys like him and not just for the shareholders of CN and CP. The government could provide low-interest cash advances so that farmers can meet their obligations to their financial institutions, because they are worrying. They have loans that are coming due that have to be paid. Their crops are not getting out, so they do not have the money to pay them to meet their obligations.

The government could also ask or work with the financial institutions to extend the terms of the loans of these farmers, to help them out, to give them a hand up, and to help them out in this crisis they are facing.

There are things the government could do and should do for western farmers. We are certainly hoping that the government is thinking about farmers like Ryan tonight, farmers in Saskatchewan, in Manitoba, in Alberta, and all over the country, who are tossing and turning because they cannot move their product to market.

We hear a lot from the governing party about the fact that they are speaking for real western Canadian families, but we know that they have to make that distinction between real western Canadian families and fake western Canadian families, because we know that in their caucus previously they have had members who say they live in Saskatchewan when they actually live in Toronto.

Throughout this emergency debate, I find it very rich and disappointing to hear criticism from the Conservative government that we do not actually understand the needs of western farmers because we do not live there, when they actually have members in their caucus who did not actually live on the Prairies but pretended that they did. We should not be pointing fingers.

The other thing that bothered me tonight about the governing party is that it blames the backlog on unions. That is just preposterous. Any western Canadian farmer knows that the backlog was not created by the teamsters. They know that, so it is ridiculous to divide workers and farmers in this country when we know that we have to work together to solve these problems. Western farmers do not want to hear us having these divisive little fights about unions and farmers. They want to see us work together to solve these problems.

I have not heard a lot of solutions. I did try to help the government on May 29. I spoke on the Fair Rail Freight Service Act, and I put forward the things that the Western Canadian Shippers' Coalition wanted in terms of service agreements. What I was given in terms of an answer was that the government could not actually implement these because they would be a nuisance to the railway companies and it had to be somewhat fair.

Now we are seeing the effects of not including the Western Canadian Shippers' Coalition's suggestions in that legislation. Farming organizations are saying we have to put those amendments in. The legislation is already passed. I have heard government members saying, yes, maybe we do have to amend this, maybe we do have to review it earlier. If we had done that back in May, maybe we would have avoided these problems.

I am not saying the Wheat Board was God's greatest gift to western farmers, but when we make a radical change and we eliminate something, we have to actually plan what the out-rolling of production will be after that body is eliminated. We always talk about how the government is incrementalist, but when it came to eliminating the single desk, it was not incrementalist at all. It made a radical move, it did not plan properly, and it did not listen to western farmers and their suggestions on the problems that would come out of it.

During the Keystone Agricultural Producers convention in Winnipeg in January 2012, farmers talked about all these problems. These were farmers from the Prairies getting together and talking about what the problems of eliminating the single desk would be. They talked about it. I am sure the government heard them. I do not know if it listened properly. However, it did not take into account those suggestions when it came to drafting its legislation, and here we are with a crisis.

We have to find solutions for these farmers, for guys like Ryan, who cannot sleep tonight.

[Leon Benoit, Conservative, Vegreville—Wainwright, AB]

Mr. Speaker, I would like to thank the gentleman across the floor for his presentation. He did ask some important questions and made some important comments about how farmers, if they cannot move their grain, are going to manage repaying loans from this crop, from seeding this crop over the past few months, and then moving into buying inputs for this next crop. They are valid questions.

I do know that our government has talked to the farm credit corporation and it has indicated it is going to work with farmers as much as it can on this.

I do know that banks understand very well that they are going to have to be patient with repayments, and they will work with farmers on this. They know it is not to their advantage to start pressuring farmers at this point. It does not make any sense. We have been encouraged by that.

We do know that only 40% of the farmers have taken advantage of the cash advance that is available to them. It is maybe slightly more difficult than it has been in the past to apply, but it is not particularly difficult. Once a person has applied once, it is certainly easier the next time. The reality is that this cash is available to the 60% of the farmers who have not used it. I think it is up to $400,000 a year maximum.

However, in the past, governments have delayed that repayment. I believe our government even delayed the repayment requirement. I am not saying we will do that. We are willing to look at anything that has to be done to help farmers through this.

[Jamie Nicholls, NDP, Vaudreuil—Soulanges, QC]

Mr. Speaker, it is good to hear from the member that there are solutions out there. I would urge farmers who are going through this difficulty to look at the cash advance program that exists for them.

Certainly, I know that a lot of farmers in western Canada are going to have cash flow problems, so they are going to need the government to step up and tell them that this program exists. If the farmers do not know about it, we also have to ask the question as to why. Has the government reduced its service-giving capacity in this way? Has it reduced points of service for farmers? Why do they not know about it?

It is also heartening to hear that the member at least understands what farmers are going through and how banks have to understand that as well.

[Ralph Goodale, Liberal, Wascana, SK]

Mr. Speaker, at the end of four and a half hours of debate, I wonder if we could agree that one thing we need to do is amend the level of service legislation to provide for liquidated damages payable directly to farmers when railways fail to deliver on their service level commitments.

Second, the government needs to assist the railways to ensure they have adequate locomotive power and railway rolling stock and trained personnel to move the maximum value.

Third, could we agree that we need full transparency for the total volumes of grain booked to be shipped through west coast ports, transparency about the timeframes for those shipments, and the number of marine vessels that have been ordered to take delivery?

Could we agree that we need to provide some sensible, business-like coordination throughout the system to replace the kind of chaos we have seen over the last six to eight months?

Could we agree that the government should table a plan to maximize throughput through Vancouver, Prince Rupert, and especially Churchill, while the permafrost is in place, and also south, through U.S. facilities, if that is necessary?

Could we agree at the end of this discussion that those are very simple, practical, and reasonable steps that need to be taken to alleviate the pressure in the system at the earliest possible moment? We have to act as a Parliament, long before any five-year study that would put this solution off into never-never land. The problem is now. The crisis is now. The government needs to move now, not five years from now.

[Jamie Nicholls, NDP, Vaudreuil—Soulanges, QC]

Mr. Speaker, we would certainly agree that the time to act is now. There is no time to wait.

In terms of the member's proposals, I would forward them to our excellent expert on these matters, our agriculture critic, the member for Welland.

We also asked for many changes to the Fair Rail Freight Service Act. I could outline those again, but anyone could find them in my statements in the May 29, 2013 Hansard.

Certainly, we have to act now. I think everyone in this chamber tonight could agree that this is an urgent situation. Our farmers are great contributors to our economy. We have to step up to the plate to help them, one way or another.

[The Acting Speaker, Conservative, Bruce Stanton]

We have about a minute and a half left in the time allocated for tonight's debate.

I will recognize the hon. member for Medicine Hat.

[LaVar Payne, Conservative, Medicine Hat, AB]

Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to stand tonight, even if only for a minute and a half, to support our government's long-standing and strong record of support for Canadian grain farmers and the entire agricultural sector.

Our government's top priority remains the economy, and we recognize that the grain sector plays a big part in that whole aspect. We understand farmers' frustration, because we hear it day and day out, with the railway system and the grain not moving fast enough.

When I previously spoke, I said that industry has applauded our assistance in trying to move this forward. Dennis Thiessen, director of the Grain Growers of Canada, said this week:

We want to thank [the Minister of Agriculture] for continuing to recognize the rail capacity needs of grain farmers and the urgency of the current situation.... [The government's] recommendations make sense and they are needed at this time. Improving the frequency of reporting and better communications with industry, railways, government and farmers at the table is what is needed to get the grain moving.

We have been working extremely hard in terms of the Wheat Board, trying to get new breeding clusters in place. There are so many things that we are doing that I do not have enough time to touch on them all.

Thank you for the opportunity, Mr. Speaker.

[The Acting Speaker, Conservative, Bruce Stanton]

It being 12 midnight, I declare the motion carried.

Accordingly, the House stands adjourned until later this day at 10 a.m., pursuant to Standing Order 24(1).

(The House adjourned at 12 a.m.)