Quit complaining about transportation

[TOM4CWB]

DML,

I call your bluff.

You have absolutely NO proof that SALIK has anything more than a place at the table allowing it to buy Ag products... on a competitive basis... with any other end user in the global market place. The Saudis are a 3rd party minority shareholder... and Bunge has no obligation to give the Saudi's any cheap grain or sweet deals.

I guess you need some Foil as well???

[dmlfarmer]

No Tom, I only have the mission statement and vision of SALIC to go on. As soon as the deal was announced, I checked the SALIC website and the primary goal of SALIC was cheap food for SA. Interesting, since the CWB deal, the website has changed to take out that statement but you can still find reference to that in King Abdulla's inititive in setting up SALIC in 2012.

Actually study the deal tom instead of taking Ritz's talking points. See what each party put up. Actually look at the reasons why each party entered the agreement. Great for CWB, Great for Harper government, Great for SALIC, Great for Bunge, great for SA, bad for Canadian farmers - but then why should that matter, we never lost any money from poor rail either did we Tom!

[TOM4CWB]

DML,

I lost a little interest on the transport problem... thats it. For folks who planned cash flow well ahead... the basis was not an issue. Cash pricers with good reserves also could wait out the backlog.

Or haul to the US... etc etc. There are enough small grainco's that many options were available. The transport problem stopped cheap US meal and corn from dragging down our domestic feed market as well because it wasn't getting up here.

[MBgrower]

Tom, i dont want to view your videos, leave that shit out of these threads, text and hyperlinks only please.

[riders2010]

So tom the backlog actually gave farmers more money?

Are you and ritzy maybe enjoying what the ford boys use? Holy cow psychotic rhetoric.

[TOM4CWB]

Riders
As always timing is everything
It did cost extra interest as I said earlier.

Your simple view of what Minister Ritz meant lacks personal context and understanding.
I have found Gerry to be kind, understanding and compassionate.

And he trys to be funny to spice things up!

[dmlfarmer]

Tom:
Then why has Ritz not retracted his statement? Why has he not corrected what he said? Until he does, I can only believe his actual quotes.

[TOM4CWB]

DML

It doesn't seem to matter what Minister Ritz does... everyone blames him for everything that goes 'wrong'!!!

Article from the Financial Post is a great read... saying the opposite of you folks!!!

Mary-Jane Bennett, Special to Financial Post | November 5, 2014 12:57 PM ET

Further Canadian railroad regulation would be ‘crazy’

In 2011 Canadian Agriculture Minister Gerry Ritz dismantled the Canadian Wheat Board because open markets “attract investment, encourage innovation and create jobs.” By last year, however, he’d changed his tune.

"Chokepoint, USA: The story of how one city has snarled North America's rail industry"

Last May, Ritz re-regulated the rail industry, forcing quotas on Canada’s two major rail companies. He tabled the Fair Rail for Grain Farmers Act due to the significant slow-downs in the movement of grain by rail. Rail companies said the delays were a one-off that resulted from two combined factors: a crop 50% larger than normal and a winter so cold “it put us on our knees,” according to CN CEO Claude Mongeau. But Ritz dismissed these explanations, blaming the railways for the delays and dubbing the record crop “the new normal.” The Canadian economy, he claimed, was being “held hostage by rail service.”

As another winter sets in, and Canada’s rail companies begin transporting this year’s smaller crop, it is worth examining Ritz’s approach. The U.S. also faced extreme winter conditions last year and a “bin buster” crop and, as in Canada, the railways snarled up as soon as the bad weather set in last November.

Related
Ottawa tightens railway safety measures in wake of Lac-Megantic train disaster
Why some global commodities players are shipping less Canadian crude by rail now
By February, the average wait times for trains moving through freezing Minneapolis and snowy Chicago had almost doubled. While Canada turned to heavy-handed re-regulation of the railways, the U.S. rail regulator, the Surface Transportation Board, opted instead to monitor the railways, requiring them to file weekly plans outlining how they planned to keep grain shipments running.

Canada’s new legislation, however, specifies precisely how much grain CN and CP must deliver each week, forcing rail companies to prioritize grain ahead of all other commodities. And the law allows other railways to access CN and CP’s track by expanding inter-switching rights. This has meant, in effect, that rail competitors can access CN and CP’s track at almost half the cost. This not only distorts market pricing, but it also means shipments are handled twice, resulting in slow-downs and inefficiencies.

Advertisement

Importantly, this also deters railway investment. Investors and railways alike have little appetite for fixing a line to benefit a competitor’s entry. With railways across North America poised to spend roughly $30-billion next year in infrastructure fixes and upgrades, railways and their directors will look to two critical factors when deciding whether to invest: Can economic growth be sustained? And will current rail policy allow a stable rate of return on investment?
When regulations interfere with railway operations, major, planned railway fixes tend to be delayed. “Can you imagine a company willing to continue to invest billions in tracks, terminals, locomotives and rail cars if regulation will make these assets available to competitors?” says Michael Ward, C.E.O. of CSX Transportation, a Florida-based railway serving most of the eastern U.S.

And because the new law attaches quotas on grain deliveries, grain is treated as a priority commodity meaning CN and CP face large penalties for not meeting the onerous grain shipments the law demands. Merchandise, potash, coal, oats and everything else are all delayed to ensure that grain gets priority. The law has had disastrous unintended consequences on a host of industries.

U.S. grain buyers are also furious with Canada’s new law. As a result of the new law, Canadian railways weren’t able to ship grain through U.S. corridors last winter, resulting in huge financial losses for U.S. elevators, grain handlers and processors. North Dakota Senator Kevin Cramer said the law was the “solid foundation for a successful trade violation complaint.”

But in response to U.S. fury, Ritz claimed he was considering even further regulation: “If it is necessary, it will be done,” Ritz told Reuters in June. “I’m not going to be prescriptive yet.” U.S. senior rail analyst Tony Hatch has said further Canadian railroad regulation would be “crazy.” Despite looser U.S. regulation of railways, he notes, the U.S.market-oriented system “works pretty damn well.”

On Oct. 28, however, Ritz suggested he may be backing down saying he was considering revisiting the law’s quota requirements.

While the government focuses all of its energy on grain shipment, other important rail policy was left unaddressed last year leaving a series of important questions: How can Canada commercialize grain car ordering? What to do with the grain cars, now at the end of their active lives? How can ports improve turn-around times? Should the federal government continue to cap rail revenue on grain shipment?

CN’s Mongeau has pleaded with government to “Stop beating your workhorse,” and interfering with rail operations. Ritz, rather than championing a free market one day and looking over the shoulder of railways the next, should allow the supply chain to function efficiently, and to the benefit of all players along the line — not just grain growers.

Mary-Jane Bennett is a Research Fellow at the Frontier Centre for Public Policy (www.fcpp.org).

[dmlfarmer]

Tom: Can you simply answer a question?

You keep telling us what a great man Ritz is and how he was miss quoted so I ask you again:

If what he said was not what he meant why has he not retracted the statements which he was directly quoted on? Why has not not corrected his statements?

His silence on this issue combined with your refusal to answer leads me to believe he meant what he said.

[wmoebis]

Was talking about Tom and Ritz's statements on the weekend.
The analogy came up as If you took a twig off a tree and slapped someone on the face it would be funny and do no harm.
But if you took a branch off the same tree, formed a bat out of it and nailed the same person between the eyes that would count as something worth mentioning.

[TOM4CWB]

DML.

Some goofy study saying $$$ billions lost... when bad weather... US Rail problems also occurred just as much... and you claim Minister Ritz did nothing... when the article above says the exact opposite... Minister Ritz did way too much for grain farmers.

[TOM4CWB]

WM,

According to the RR... Minister Ritz DID hit them between the eyes with a baseball bat... on rail grain transportation. No way Minister Ritz can possibly win in this situation.