Liberal western caucus supports farm option
By Adrian Ewins
Saskatoon newsroom
Grain transportation policy recommendations from Liberal backbenchers will likely form the basis for government action, says a Winnipeg MP who helped write the report.
"Whether or not it's exactly as we described it, I think it will be within a few degrees of that," Reg Alcock said in an interview last week.
The five-page report was submitted to transport minister David Collenette in early November. In it, western and northern caucus members:
* Recommended that railway revenues be capped at 18 percent below 1998 levels, with monitoring to ensure productivity gains are shared with farmers.
* Called for a five-year trial period of open access to rail lines. Anyone would have the right to run over a major carrier's line unless the major carrier could prove it would be against the public interest.
* Rejected proposals to remove the Canadian Wheat Board completely from transportation, saying the elected farmer directors of the recently restructured board should be given time to show what they can do on behalf of producers.
The report differs sharply from the recommendations of Arthur Kroeger, who recommended a revenue cap 12 percent below 1998 levels, more study on open access and an end to the CWB's role in transportation.
Alcock says the caucus report has gained support within the government, including from some influential cabinet ministers such as Canadian Wheat Board minister Ralph Goodale and agriculture minister Lyle Vanclief. And he said Collenette has been "very supportive" of a package that would incorporate the caucus's recommendations.
"With him and Goodale and Vanclief, I think we have an agreement to move in that direction," he said.
The report differs most sharply from Kroeger on the role of the CWB in grain transportation.
The caucus members agree with the principle of introducing more competition into the system, said Alcock, but he said when the government restructured the board a year ago, it told farmers that the fate of the marketing agency would be put into their hands.
"To turn around now and say 'you were elected to bring better management to the board of behalf of producers and now we're going to tell you how the board is going to manage', is just a bit too much," he said.
One farm group that supports the Kroeger report was in Ottawa last week urging the government to move quickly to bring in changes based on the three principles of a modest reduction in railway revenues, measures to encourage competition between the railways (other than open access) and an end to the CWB's transportation role.
Paul Orsak, a member of the Prairie Farm Commodity Coalition, said he came away from the lobbying trip feeling "more or less optimistic" that the government will bring in changes based on the Kroeger ideas.
"If we had got an indication that the government had decided it was too hot politically to handle or had changed its policy direction we would have been very pessimistic, but we got neither of those indications."
Orsak added that while the caucus report is "worrisome," he doesn't think it has widespread support at senior levels of government: "We didn't get a good answer on how much influence it might have ... but it probably is not that significant."
By Adrian Ewins
Saskatoon newsroom
Grain transportation policy recommendations from Liberal backbenchers will likely form the basis for government action, says a Winnipeg MP who helped write the report.
"Whether or not it's exactly as we described it, I think it will be within a few degrees of that," Reg Alcock said in an interview last week.
The five-page report was submitted to transport minister David Collenette in early November. In it, western and northern caucus members:
* Recommended that railway revenues be capped at 18 percent below 1998 levels, with monitoring to ensure productivity gains are shared with farmers.
* Called for a five-year trial period of open access to rail lines. Anyone would have the right to run over a major carrier's line unless the major carrier could prove it would be against the public interest.
* Rejected proposals to remove the Canadian Wheat Board completely from transportation, saying the elected farmer directors of the recently restructured board should be given time to show what they can do on behalf of producers.
The report differs sharply from the recommendations of Arthur Kroeger, who recommended a revenue cap 12 percent below 1998 levels, more study on open access and an end to the CWB's role in transportation.
Alcock says the caucus report has gained support within the government, including from some influential cabinet ministers such as Canadian Wheat Board minister Ralph Goodale and agriculture minister Lyle Vanclief. And he said Collenette has been "very supportive" of a package that would incorporate the caucus's recommendations.
"With him and Goodale and Vanclief, I think we have an agreement to move in that direction," he said.
The report differs most sharply from Kroeger on the role of the CWB in grain transportation.
The caucus members agree with the principle of introducing more competition into the system, said Alcock, but he said when the government restructured the board a year ago, it told farmers that the fate of the marketing agency would be put into their hands.
"To turn around now and say 'you were elected to bring better management to the board of behalf of producers and now we're going to tell you how the board is going to manage', is just a bit too much," he said.
One farm group that supports the Kroeger report was in Ottawa last week urging the government to move quickly to bring in changes based on the three principles of a modest reduction in railway revenues, measures to encourage competition between the railways (other than open access) and an end to the CWB's transportation role.
Paul Orsak, a member of the Prairie Farm Commodity Coalition, said he came away from the lobbying trip feeling "more or less optimistic" that the government will bring in changes based on the Kroeger ideas.
"If we had got an indication that the government had decided it was too hot politically to handle or had changed its policy direction we would have been very pessimistic, but we got neither of those indications."
Orsak added that while the caucus report is "worrisome," he doesn't think it has widespread support at senior levels of government: "We didn't get a good answer on how much influence it might have ... but it probably is not that significant."