Transport committee  Yes. I think the rail freight service review process, the level-of-service agreements, and the structure that's been established as a result of that process have improved the situation. Certainly we would like to see railways continue to enter into those agreements with our other

Transport committee  Because of the different requirements for various commodity types, I think it would be difficult to establish a prescriptive set of performance requirements for the individual areas. It would vary with the shipper. It would vary with the location. It would vary with the commodity

Transport committee  It's hard to come up with a specific example, but the concern is that because the arbitrator will have the obligation or the mandate to impose a service-level agreement on the railways, that agreement itself may impose requirements on them in terms of service levels that prevent

Transport committee  May I respond?

Transport committee  I agree, and I recognize that the provision is within the proposed legislation. I think it's critical in that case, though, that the arbitrator, the decision-maker, is as informed as possible as to the implications for the whole supply chain, which was the second aspect of our re

Transport committee  I would say that there wasn't the same motivation.

Transport committee  I mean on the part of the railway. It's not that they weren't interested in service. I would say, in short, that certainly there was an encouragement to demonstrate that they were willing to listen to the concerns of port authorities and terminal operators, and they recognized we

Transport committee  Honourable member, I think we have to expect that the problems are not going to go away. Our goal is to increase the flow of Canadian goods and to expand Canadian trade. As a result, I think everyone will be pressed—port authorities, shippers, and rail operators—to continue to pr

Transport committee  Mr. Daniel, I think there are performance metrics that are built into the service-level agreement that's in place between the port and Maher and CN. I would mirror Mr. Malec's comments that the key is to ensure that you have a consistent and fair way of evaluating performance. I

Transport committee  No. What I meant was we're not buying a product from the railway. The railway is not providing rail service to us.

Transport committee  We're a participant and we're a stakeholder in that service, so the railways have voluntarily entered into a level-of-service agreement with the terminal operator and the port. To be frank, I think the rail service review process was probably a motivator and encouraged railways

Transport committee  That's true. I suppose, to use a crass phrase, the meat in the sandwich is the railway, and the remedy for the shipper in that case is the railway. The railway, in turn, would then exert commercial pressure on the terminal operators to make their system more efficient so that the

Transport committee  In that sense it makes sense because it involves other parties, so long as the terminals, and the ports as well, have similar pressure that they can exert upon the railways.

Transport committee  Mr. Daniel, with respect to the service-level agreements that we have in place at this time, the agreement that I would point to is between the port, CN Rail, and Maher Terminals, our container terminal operator. Now, the port doesn't have a contract with the railway. We don't r

Transport committee  There are performance.... I'm sorry to interrupt you; yes, there are. There have been established thresholds for railcar cycle time and dwell time and such other things that really affect the efficiency of the system. I think our principal goal, from a port authority standpoint