• You will need to login or register before you can post a message. If you already have an Agriville account login by clicking the login icon on the top right corner of the page. If you are a new user you will need to Register.

Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

CFA: Farmers Need A Rail Cost Review. Do you agree?

Collapse
X
Collapse
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

    CFA: Farmers Need A Rail Cost Review. Do you agree?

    CFA sent us this commentary, do you agree?

    OTTAWA -- Leaders of the Canadian Federation of Agriculture (CFA) were at the House of Commons Standing Committee on Agriculture and Agri-Food this past Thursday calling on the government to immediately launch a review of costs associated with shipping grain by rail. The committee heard from witnesses Humphrey Banack, CFA director and President of Wild Rose Agricultural Producers, and Allen Oberg, CFA National Council member and Chair of the Canadian Wheat Board.

    The CFA representatives highlighted to committee members how transportation is a major expense for grain farmers, underlining that farmers have no alternative but to use rail to ship their grain to export positions. This situation has led to inadequate performance and excessive costs to producers.

    "Our message is clear. We need the Canadian government to put a rail costing review into motion right away - not a year from now or two years from now," said Banack. "Freight rates need to be based upon actual costs, not annual revisions to outdated formulas."

    "Minister Strahl has committed only to begin thinking about the possibility of a costing review after the current rail service review is completed. Somehow, we've got to get our elected representatives to understand that these are separate issues, involving entirely different groups of analysts and experts," said Allen Oberg.

    The CFA reviewed the Interim Report of the government's Rail Service Review panel and raised concern over the Report's observation that poor service levels are due in part to the rail companies' monopoly. "The report portrays an accurate reflection of the problems grain farmers face," said Banack.

    Banack also stated that CFA recognizes the service review panel's mandate explicitly excluded cost- or price-related issues including: freight rates, the revenue cap, ancillary charges and competitive access rates. He noted however, that the review panel did outline many problems with railway costs and, for grain farmers in Western Canada, this is of paramount importance.

    In an official response to the Interim Report, CFA recommended that the panel recognize the deficiencies in the current revenue cap calculations and call on the Minister of Transport to immediately initiate a full railway costing review. As well, CFA advised that its members are not prepared to endorse a proposal that would give railways until 2013 to improve their services in a near monopoly environment.

    Source: Canadian Federation of Agriculture

    #2
    the railways have at least 7 professional lawyered up lobbyists with almost unlimited funding. Not much fun for anyone but them.

    thought the review was part of the CTA now and already was law? What happened?

    Comment


      #3
      How about including a marketing cost review at the same time????

      Comment


        #4
        Goodale, Easter, McCallum were all saying the same thing yesterday.

        They had the power when they had a majority to do something and didn't.

        Chances are, if Harper brought a bill to do something about it those three amigos would vote against it.

        Everyone wants to do something but it never gets done. Wonder why that is when it comes to the railways?

        Maybe the senators would lose some of their dividends.

        Comment


          #5
          Mr. O will get his few special farmers appointed to the study Committee.

          The CWB will offer to pay for Greying Ricky at the UofS to head up and write the Study.The Railroads will cheer and kick in cash.

          Eastern Canada will get some freight conession from the Feds. ie "At Port"

          But it will be CFA plugging money/favors for the East as they always do.

          Western farmers will pay, but they won't notice or complain.

          70 years of precedent for doing it the same old way.

          Agstar will consider his math sound; he just won't have all the figures, but he 'trusts' the Board.

          ps
          Richard Gray will continue to be Ricky, (btw does he write all those reports in a trailer?)

          Oberg will get re-elected.

          Pars

          Comment


            #6
            food4u

            You think like an idiot, the CWB will think, and Ontario will think, and CFA will think.

            You see, foodie, Western farmers already pay for branding. And all of Quebec and Ontario's licensing. And then all those customs agents jobs in Eastern Canada checking cWB grains, would be tallied and Western farmers would get curious about all the 'other costs', as well.

            So my dear foodie, the benfitted would npot be pleased with your kind of a study. Pars

            Comment


              #7
              Pars-- don't you think it would be nice to know what our marketing cost really are? I know I sure would. Not just some numbers printed out in an annual report to satify the bureaucrats.

              Comment


                #8
                You bet I think we need cost discovery.

                I agree with you 100%! Trouble is, the gov, the graincos, the cwb, CFA, railways, ships, AC's, directors, all have an agenda diff from farmers, imho.

                If they wanted transparency, all of them would be screaming blue murder for a pay and say blog.

                Ritz could give a Ministerial order tommorow to disclose all costs.

                CFA could have done it every year for 70 years. They were sure handy on the spot when they supported Ontario out of the Wartime monopoly...a full Canadian monopoly including the East, at that time.

                Foodie...they would try to disparage anyone wanting transparency. imho

                Should be.
                You're dead on.
                Glad you brought it up.
                A priority of Western farmers.
                Pars

                Comment


                  #9
                  I have been around for fair numbers of years as a farmer. Everytime things get a little warm for the CWB they divert attention by picking on the transportation side of the business.

                  Comment


                    #10
                    Divert and continue.
                    Repeat as necessary.

                    Comment


                      #11
                      BTW - Where is chuckChuck?

                      Speaking of costs....

                      CWB premiums.........6.65
                      CWB mktg costs.......10.14

                      NET LOSS............3.49

                      chuckChuck said he disagreed with these numbers but never said why.
                      Kept wanting to talk about other things...

                      Divert & continue......

                      Comment


                        #12
                        Its funny that pro-cwb people can't look at things objectively.

                        There are things the pro-cwb people write here that make think differently and sometimes I can see their point.

                        But chuckles can't seem to put 2 and 2 together on this discusion you are trying to have with him. It really makes me embarrassed to be a farmer.

                        Comment

                        • Reply to this Thread
                        • Return to Topic List
                        Working...