House of Commons Hansard #64 of the 41st Parliament, 2nd Session. (The original version is on Parliament's site.) The word of the day was companies.
Charlie Angus NDP Timmins—James Bay, ON
With regard to government funding, what is the total amount, by fiscal years 2011-2012 and 2012-2013, allocated within the constituency of Timmins—James Bay, specifying each department or agency, initiative and amount?
(Return tabled)
Claude Gravelle NDP Nickel Belt, ON
With regard to government funding, what is the total amount allocated for fiscal year 2012-2013 within the constituency of Nickel Belt, specifying each department, agency, initiative and amount?
(Return tabled)
Kelly Block Conservative Saskatoon—Rosetown—Biggar, SK
Mr. Speaker, I ask that the remaining questions be allowed to stand.
Rona Ambrose Conservative Edmonton—Spruce Grove, AB
moved that Bill C-30, An Act to amend the Canada Grain Act and the Canada Transportation Act and to provide for other measures, be read the second time and referred to a committee.
Fair Rail for Grain Farmers ActGovernment Orders
Glengarry—Prescott—Russell Ontario
Conservative
Pierre Lemieux ConservativeParliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Agriculture
Mr. Speaker, I am proud to stand today to speak to Bill C-30, Fair Rail for Grain Farmers Act.
Today we debate this important bill that has the singular purpose of improving our supply chain and rail logistics in Canada. Since its introduction on Wednesday, the ministers of agriculture and transport have been out on the ground, meeting with stakeholders in that supply chain and working hard to ensure that this gets done properly and quickly.
The current transportation challenges affect all players in the supply chain, and it is essential that Canadian shippers remain competitive in domestic and international markets. Our government is focused on a way forward that will benefit all shippers, selling every commodity from grain to oil, and that will continue to grow our resource economy.
That is why we are taking immediate action to get all commodities moving faster, through legislation and regulations that are designed to increase supply chain transparency, strengthen contracts between producers and shippers, and help ensure the entire grain handling and transportation system is working at peak capacity. This legislation addresses the immediate needs of our economy and longer-term challenges because our economy needs a system that works today and tomorrow, with the capacity to move what is grown.
Yes, we are counting on all sides of the House of Commons to do the right thing and help us to implement these critical measures as quickly as possible. Our economy depends on it. As we all know, farmers delivered a record crop last year, one-third higher than the previous year and 50% higher than average. As many have said, if this type of performance is expected to be the new normal, we must prepare for that. That is what this legislation is about.
Farmers have not been able to deliver their grain to port or to customers, meaning that they do not have cash to finance their operators or storage capacity for next year's crop. A record $5 billion worth of grain could be sitting in farmers' bins, heading into the next crop year.
That is why earlier this month, we brought forward an order in council under the Canada Transportation Act to stabilize the national transportation system and to get grain moving to port. The order in council requires the Canadian National and Canadian Pacific Railways to move a minimum quantity of western regulated grain each week. We are now building upon that order in council.
We will amend the Canada Transportation Act so that it includes the power to regulate volume requirements, as necessary, and extend the interswitching distances to 160 km for all commodities in the Prairies. We will also amend the Canada Grain Act in order to regulate grain contract provisions; require other information to increase transparency of the performance of railways, ports and terminals; and create the regulatory authority to add greater specificity to service level agreements, as requested by all shippers.
These concrete and comprehensive measures will take effect immediately after they are passed.
Under the bill, we will amend the Canada Transportation Act to set out minimum volumes of grain, in extraordinary circumstances, that railways are required to transport, at the joint recommendation of the Minister of Transport and the Minister of Agriculture and Agri-Food. This change would provide greater predictability for shippers and producers, supporting specific volume performance requirements and ensuring that the supply chain is prepared to respond to peak demand.
Second, our government is creating the regulatory authority to enable the Canadian Transportation Agency to extend interswitching distances to 160 kilometres from 30 kilometres for all commodities on the prairies. Interswitching is an operation performed by railway companies in which one carrier picks up cars from a shipper and drops off these cars to another carrier that performs the line haul.
Increasing the access that farmers and elevators have to the lines of competing railway companies will increase competition among railways for business and give shippers more transportation options. Up to 150 elevators would then have access to more than one railway, compared to only 14 right now. This will increase competition among railways as well as the grain elevators for farmers' business.
Third, we will amend the Canada Grain Act to strengthen contracts between producers and shippers. Regulatory provisions could be created to require that grain companies compensate producers if they do not honour their contracts.
Fourth, we are establishing regulatory power to add great specificity to service level agreements, as asked for by all shippers. We will do this by defining in regulations which operational requirements would be mandatory in these agreements.
These are the immediate measures we are taking in this legislation to get the grain moving now and over the coming months. But we are not stopping there.
We will also require the railways to deliver more timely and detailed data on grain movement. This will help in monitoring the performance of the supply chain. The Canadian Transportation Agency will also gather information from all grain supply chain partners on shipping capacities and plans prior to each new crop year.
This legislation will allow us to adopt clear and realistic solutions so that Canadian shippers have access to a world-class logistics system that will ensure predictable and timely shipping of Canada's agricultural and other products to markets.
Today we are also announcing that the government will expedite the review of the Canada Transportation Act, which will focus first on rail transportation.
This expedited review will evaluate solutions to the structural problems of the grain supply chain and determine how to amend the Canada Transportation Act in order to create a more flexible system.
Taken together, these measures would strengthen contracts between producers and shippers, improve performance by railways, and help ensure that the entire supply chain is working at full capacity.
As the minister of agriculture for Alberta said:
We are pleased that the federal government has brought forward the Fair Rail for Grain Farmers Act, which addresses some of our concerns and will help strengthen rail transportation system performance in the immediate- and long-term.
The minister of agriculture for Manitoba said:
The Manitoba government supports this move as it means trains will be able to travel longer distances along other rail companies’ tracks and will improve Manitoba’s access to the port in Churchill as well as important U.S. markets
Finally, the Canadian Canola Growers Association said:
The measures announced in yesterday’s Bill, along with other efforts recently implemented demonstrate that Government is listening to farmers concerns.
This legislation is not the final step. Our government will continue to engage the full value chain and the provinces to look at the challenges of transporting this year's record harvest and identify all and any improvements moving forward. At the same time, our government will continue to build a stronger grain sector through an aggressive trade and innovation agenda.
We are looking forward to the debate in the House today. This legislation will be moving to committee as soon as possible. I do look to my colleagues in the other parties to support this important legislation before the House.
Ruth Ellen Brosseau NDP Berthier—Maskinongé, QC
Mr. Speaker, we have been asking the government to take action for months and it is quite disappointing. The member quoted some people selectively, cherry-picking them.
I would like to quote Saskatchewan minister Lyle Stewart, who said he thinks "the railways came out the big winners" in the legislation. He thinks the legislation does not go far enough and he does not agree with the sunset clause in two years. He also said that the legislation “...doesn’t give much of a sense of security to producers or shippers...”.
I am just wondering if the parliamentary secretary could comment, because everyone is not happy with this. Could he assure us that he would be willing to accept amendments to make the bill a better piece of legislation to prevent another grain crisis in the coming years?
Pierre Lemieux Conservative Glengarry—Prescott—Russell, ON
Mr. Speaker, as I mentioned earlier today, this is decisive legislation. It would impose a very ambitious but achievable and realistic target for the rail companies. They are going to be required to move one million metric tonnes of grain on the Prairies each and every week. That is more than double what they were moving a number of weeks ago.
In addition, this legislation would impose administrative monetary penalties of $100,000 a day for non-compliance.
The member is right that she and her NDP colleagues have been asking for action, and that is exactly what this legislation would deliver, after consultations with all of the key stakeholders. That is why the one million metric tonnes is so important. It is ambitious but achievable.
I ask my colleague this question. Will she support this legislation? Will she stand in her place and vote to move this legislation into law for the benefit of our grain farmers?
Ralph Goodale Liberal Wascana, SK
Mr. Speaker, I am sure that the hon. parliamentary secretary would agree that the minister of agriculture in Saskatchewan, Mr. Stewart, has the interests of farmers at heart, consistent with his long-standing reputation in the public life of Saskatchewan. He says there are serious defects with this legislation.
We have also heard concerns expressed by the Saskatchewan Association of Rural Municipalities, the Saskatchewan Canola Growers Association, and the Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Foreign Affairs. A number of people have said this legislation is far from perfect.
I wonder if the parliamentary secretary could assure us simply that when this does go to committee—and there is, I think, a will in the House to move this through quickly today and get it before the Standing Committee on Agriculture and Agri-Food—that the affairs of the standing committee will be organized in such a way that every representative of farm organizations from western Canada who wants to be heard on this subject will have the opportunity to be heard, that none of their testimony will be curtailed, and that the government will at least have the flexibility to listen to the recommendations where improvements could be achieved?
Everyone here wants the same result. We want the grain to move effectively and in a timely way. Will the government show some flexibility and undertake to at least listen to those who have concerns?
Pierre Lemieux Conservative Glengarry—Prescott—Russell, ON
Mr. Speaker, of course I can assure the member and all other members that the government will listen and does listen. This legislation is actually the product of our listening and consulting with stakeholders who are seized with this challenge of moving grain to port.
As the member mentioned, the legislation is in front of the House for debate this afternoon and will then be moving to committee. It is the work of committee to determine how many witnesses will realistically be able to come to be heard at committee with their points of view on the bill. The committee will definitely be listening. MPs from all parties who are members of the committee will certainly be listening to the witnesses who come to comment on the bill. This will follow the normal legislative process, except that it is a more accelerated process because this is a very pressing problem that needs to be addressed in the immediate future.
Peter Stoffer NDP Sackville—Eastern Shore, NS
Mr. Speaker, two members of the opposition from two different parties asked a very straightforward question: is the government willing to accept amendments to a bill that is fundamentally flawed? My colleague from Regina is correct that everyone here wants the exact same thing, to get this valuable product to port in a timely fashion. It is not a very difficult question.
It is not time for arrogance or political gamesmanship. It is a simple question: is the government willing to accept amendments to improve this legislation, yes or no?
Pierre Lemieux Conservative Glengarry—Prescott—Russell, ON
Mr. Speaker, I answered the question. Perhaps the member was not listening when I answered. The bill is going to committee. When it goes to committee, it is the work of committee to have witnesses come to comment on the bill, and the committee will be paying very close attention to the witnesses. That is why it will be inviting witnesses to comment on the bill.
The member also mentioned that it is a shortsighted bill, but I would argue that there are organizations that support this bill and that considerable consultation has gone into putting together this legislation now in front of Parliament.
I will quote the Canadian Canola Growers Association, which said, “The measures announced in yesterday's Bill, along with other efforts recently implemented demonstrate that Government is listening to farmers concerns.” The Canadian Canola Growers Association said the government was listening to farmers, which is what the member is asking for. We are already doing it. We will continue to do it and the committee will be to continue to hear from witnesses on this important legislation.
Jeff Watson ConservativeParliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Transport
Mr. Speaker, I of course expect to be participating at committee and hearing from witnesses next week when this legislation gets to committee. It is important because we not only have the Minister of Agriculture and Agri-Food but also the Minister of Transport co-operating to bring this important legislation forward.
I think I heard earlier today that the Manitoba government, for example, has said some very supportive things. I wonder if the member could share some of the feedback that we are hearing from important stakeholders who have been consulted extensively in this process.
Pierre Lemieux Conservative Glengarry—Prescott—Russell, ON
Mr. Speaker, there have been numerous quotes and citations from stakeholders who support the legislation. They support the legislation because it is ambitious, but also realistic and achievable because of the excellent consultation between our Minister of Agriculture, our Minister of Transport, and the stakeholders in the supply chain management system. There is no sense setting goals that are completely unachievable, as they would serve no useful purpose. But we do want to set goals that are ambitious.
To respond very directly, the Manitoba minister of agriculture said:
The Manitoba government supports this move as it means trains will be able to travel longer distances along other rail companies' tracks and will improve Manitoba's access to the port in the Churchill, as well as important U.S. markets.
The Alberta minister of agriculture said:
We are pleased that the federal government has brought forward the Fair Rail for Grain Farmers Act....
The support is there.
Ralph Goodale Liberal Wascana, SK
Mr. Speaker, I wonder if the parliamentary secretary would give us the specific assurance that in any regulations that may be published under the legislation, the situation affecting producer cars and short-line railways would be taken into account and that they would be afforded the kind of priority in the system that farmers would expect them to have?
Pierre Lemieux Conservative Glengarry—Prescott—Russell, ON
Mr. Speaker, as I mentioned, these types of stakeholders are part of the consultation process. The legislation will be going in front of committee and witnesses will be asked to come to committee to comment on the legislation. I would not be surprised at all if these types of stakeholders do come in front of committee.
I must say that the final decisions regarding witnesses and who will come to committee rest with the committee, but the committee will be making certain that it hears from key stakeholders that would be affected by the legislation.
Ruth Ellen Brosseau NDP Berthier—Maskinongé, QC
Mr. Speaker, I rise today to speak to Bill C-30, An Act to amend the Canada Grain Act and the Canada Transportation Act and to provide for other measures.
The new measures set out in this bill include the extension of inter-switching limits from 30 km to 160 km in Alberta, Manitoba and Saskatchewan; shipping contract provisions, particularly with regard to the sanctions imposed when a contract is broken and dispute resolution; and the regulatory powers set out in the Canada Transportation Act with regard to foods that will be monitored to determine whether shippers are abiding by the agreements concerning the quantity of grain that must be shipped.
I am going to talk more about the content of this bill, but first I would like to provide some background information.
For a number of months now, grain farmers have been extremely frustrated with the problems they are having moving the grain they harvested last summer. These transportation difficulties are resulting in a drop in the quality of their grain and thus a drop in its price. They are worried that they will not be able to transport future harvests. Between $14.5 billion and $20 billion worth of grain is sitting in bins and cannot be moved. That is huge and unbelievable. It is estimated that the backlog is between 17 and 27 million metric tons.
This situation is all the more untenable since business partners are losing confidence. Not everyone is aware of this, but those who are dealing with consequences of the grain transportation backlog on a daily basis can tell you that this is a serious situation.
For a long time, Lynn Jacobson, President of the Alberta Federation of Agriculture, has been asking shippers to increase their capacity to respond to the need. We have been asking the same thing for months. Like everyone, Canada's grain farmers have bills to pay and loans to repay, and the banks will not wait.
For months, we have been urging the government to take action in order to achieve tangible results for farmers. It is completely unacceptable for hard-working farmers to be unable to ship their grain. In my opinion, this bill does not go far enough.
Two weeks ago, I was in Saskatchewan and met with farmers who told me what effect this transportation crisis had on their bottom line. I had a chance to better understand the situation and how complex it is. One farmer I met with made a map for me. This map now hangs in my office and has come in quite handy. A few things have become clear to me thanks to his explanation, such as prices, for one. Producers are seeing a large gap between the farm gate price and what they are seeing at the port. The most recent numbers I have seen are from March 19. The price in Davidson was $5.75 per bushel, and the price at the port of Vancouver for the same period was $10.60 per bushel. That is half.
I am disappointed to see that given the crisis, which is costing $8.3 billion in lost sales, there is still no direct compensation for farmers. I would have liked to have seen measures in this bill that would have compensated farmers for their losses.
When I met with farmers in Saskatchewan, one of them told me that he felt lucky, because his crop had been destroyed by a hail storm recently. He was lucky, because he had crop insurance, and he came out ahead of most farmers, despite that hail storm. This is not how farming should work. If our farmers produce a record bumper crop, they should be able to reap those rewards, not be penalized for years to come.
Another farmer told me that he sold high-grade grain for feed, because he could get a higher price than he could shipping it. That might be good news for the hog industry. We might be seeing some very healthy hogs this year, but for the grain producers, this is completely unacceptable.
The other thing I understand from the map is that transportation logistics is extremely complex in this country. Some of the farmers I met mentioned that there is no plan to replace the important work of the former iteration of the CWB. The NDP opposed the undemocratic and reckless gutting of the Canadian Wheat Board. We can see how important it is to have strong institutions representing our farmers and helping solve logistical issues in their interest.
I want to talk briefly about grain capacity. When the minister presented the order in council on March 7, farmers knew right away that it would not be enough. The minister is requiring that the rail companies move one million metric tonnes a week. That amount is what the railways always said they could do. Therefore, in the end, the government is forcing the railways to do something they were already going to do.
I will quote Lyle Stewart, the Minister of Agriculture for Saskatchewan, who stated:
...at first blush...the legislation itself is deficient.
We made some substantial asks and they weren't numbers that we pulled out of the air. They were numbers that we got from industry and we knew that they were achievable. We believe that 13,000 cars a week of grain could be unloaded, for instance, without handicapping other commodities that need to flow from Western Canada and we thought that $250,000 a day penalties were not out of line for non-compliance.
It is clear that the government could have required more from the railways.
It is time the government took action, but this bill does not go far enough. The minister is trying to clean up a mess that he should have predicted and prevented. The measures being imposed will expire in two years. This is not a long-term solution that will keep this from happening again.
The government lacks vision. Many agronomists and public servants at the agriculture department have said that harvests are only going to get bigger. The bill does not attempt to find long-term solutions for farmers. In addition, the majority of the measures proposed in the bill will be implemented at a later date, but the issue is all too real right now.
The fact that the measures will expire in two years demonstrates, yet again, that the Conservatives see this as a short-term issue. In reality, this is a structural issue that farmers are faced with. The problem could well resurface in just a few harvests.
The minister did not respond to requests from the hardest hit provinces. They wanted stiffer fines, compensation for grain farmers and higher minimum targets for grain cars. As I said earlier, we condemn the fact that farmers have not received any compensation. This crisis has cost farmers $8.3 billion since it began, yet there is still no direct compensation for them. The NDP would never do that to farmers.
We have long been calling for better arbitration and tougher penalties for breaking service agreements. The Conservatives refused to pass those amendments six months ago. Now that they are facing a crisis, they have started listening to us. They should also listen to the Minister of Foreign Affairs.
I would like to end my remarks on the bill by reflecting on the policy direction of the government. I would like to see the government have a comprehensive vision for agriculture in this country. Agriculture is so important. It represents one in eight jobs in this country. It is vital to our economy.
The minister is bringing in pieces of legislation that seem to be reacting to issues, rather than leading the way on ag issues. It seems that we only have a chance to debate agriculture-related bills in the House when something goes wrong. The latest grain transportation crisis is a good example of this. The government has waited months and months before acting. Then it has scrambled together a bill that could help farmers get their grain moving. This government only acts when it needs to, and it delays action as much as possible.
I wish we could work together. I am looking forward to having witnesses at committee. I am really hoping the government can agree to accept amendments and work together.
I am looking forward to seeing this bill go to committee, where we can hear witnesses and make this a better bill that will actually support farmers, get grain moving, and prevent this problem from happening in the future.
Ralph Goodale Liberal Wascana, SK
Mr. Speaker, I appreciate the hon. member's remarks. I know that she has taken some time to travel to western Canada, specifically to Saskatchewan, to meet with farmers. I think that is a very good thing.
I wonder if the member could offer some opinions on what would have prompted the Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Foreign Affairs to take the rather extraordinary step of disagreeing with his own government about the content of this legislation. He has pointed out, in particular, the likelihood that under the present draft of the legislation, short-line rail operations would be treated unfairly.
I wonder if the member could elaborate a bit more on what that unfairness would be. Again, why are we experiencing the rather unusual situation here of having a parliamentary secretary criticizing his government's own legislation?
Ruth Ellen Brosseau NDP Berthier—Maskinongé, QC
Mr. Speaker, I actually have an article here, and I would like to quote the Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Foreign Affairs. He said:
Without a consistent car supply, western Canadian shortlines and the loading facilities located on them are left in an extremely precarious position.
He goes on to say that the long-term solution to the crisis lies in mandatory service level agreements between shippers and railways, with reciprocal penalties during times of poor service.
I think he is actually standing up because this has been going on for months. I know that both opposition parties have worked very hard. We have asked questions. Last year, when Bill C-52 came to committee, we worked very hard and had a lot of amendments to make sure that it had more teeth and was a good piece of legislation that would help.
People are standing up across the country and saying that this is not enough. Now we have some members getting up, shortly after the tabling of this bill, to say that it is not enough and that we should work together to make it a better piece of legislation.
I am really hoping that the government will work with us, because on committee we are outnumbered. I can do the math. I am hoping that there is more openness and that the government members will actually listen to witnesses and to us when we come forward with amendments to make this a bill that will actually work and prevent long-term problems.
Francine Raynault NDP Joliette, QC
Mr. Speaker, I want to thank my colleague for her speech and her fine presentation.
I would like to know whether she is concerned about the fact that some producers have not delivered any of their 2013 grain harvest. With no delivery, there is no income, but those producers still have to pay for their expenses for 2013, when they sowed their fields. They are probably apprehensive about seeding their fields in spring 2014. I would like to know if the hon. member is concerned about the producers who might go bankrupt or who are on the verge of bankruptcy.
