From the TRAINS Newswire: Canadian National blasts Ottawa’s 10-year transportation plan Canadian National says a 10-year Canadian transportation plan misses an opportunity to further deregulate the nation's railroads. The plan in part would give Canada’s federal government the power to review merger proposals. A merger between a Canadian and an American railroad, such as the rebuffed union of Burlington Northern Santa Fe and CN, could be vetoed if it was not found to be in the public interest, the plan said. Transport Minister David Collenette, who introduced the plan Tuesday, also said that Ottawa would create separate Via Rail Act. Unlike most Crown corporations, Via Rail has been without specific legislation since it was created in 1977. The plan also increases protection for rail shippers and simplifies the process under which they can file for a regulatory remedy: They will no longer have to prove substantial harm to their business before launching action. "Canada has the best rail transportation system in the world – the lowest freight rates, the best service, and the most efficient operators in CN and CPR as a result of an enlightened policy of rail de-regulation since 1987,” said E. Hunter Harrison, CN’s president and CEO. "The minister's vision document fails to build on these strengths, and it fails to further de-regulate the grain transportation sector." CN said it is concerned that the plan recommends a regulated connection rate provision be incorporated in the Canada Transportation Act. An RCR – a regulated rate for moving goods over an originating railway to an interchange point for transfer to a connecting railway – would be an unprecedented regulatory measure, replacing the Competitive Line Rate under the current CTA regime. "Of equal concern is the fact that RCRs would not be reciprocal – shippers in Canada could use them to access U.S. railroads, but there would be no comparable right for U.S. shippers to access Canadian carriers. This could confer unfair and unwarranted advantages on our U.S. competitors,” Harrison said. The railroad also expressed concern about the minister's plan to remove the "substantial commercial harm" test that shippers must satisfy to qualify for regulatory relief in certain situations. The removal of this test would invite shippers to resort increasingly to the regulator, rather than a commercial agenda, on rate- and service-related issues, according to CN. “This is not the right approach," Harrison said. "Even the minister's CTA Review Panel said government transportation policy should be driven by market forces and that regulatory intervention should be a very last resort."
Being from a CN family thus totally prejudice. I never went for the BNSF/CN merger. I know we were assured that headquarters would remain in Montreal. But I don't trust corporate promises. I can't think of any reason why it would be in Canada's interest to let an American company buy CP or CN. BC Rail? Well that is another story, though I would prefer Canadian owner ship of it, but not CN. CN would destroy the southern half of BC Rail, it would only want the top 2/3's of BC Rail.
This is the one line that gets me: Public interest? Since when does a private business have to have any interest other than making money? Yes, it is great when businesses keep the public in mind but, they are essentially around to make money. Railroads take that money and dump many tax dollars back into the coffers. Hurt business and you hurt the very economy that they are driving. This is the same thing that is happening here in the U.S. You can not hold back business and expect the economy to grow! Russ
You have to realize that Canada is a population of 33 million competing against 330 million. For every one Canadian there are 10 Americans. This means we have to run a country that is physically larger than the USA, with a population that is smaller than the California population probably (not sure what the pop of Cal is). So transportation is incredibly vital in Canada, and with the population spread out the way it is; I don't want American companies determining transportation pricing in Canada. Secondly, some times the history between the two countries hasn't been good. The latest dispute is with the "soft wood industry." You have to remember we signed a "free trade" deal with the USA. Well the Americans decided that Canadians were selling their lumber too cheap so added on incredible... I forget the term... but the end result is they have collected one billion dollars from Canadian companies. What's holding up a soft wood lumber agreement between the two countries, well... that one billion dollars was collected kind of dishonestly. You see whenever a trade agreement runs out, the Americans go crazy and try to heavy hand Canadians into some bad agreements. While this is going on, they slap on tariffs which aren't legit. Well this works great for a while for the Americans. The problem comes when Canada takes them to the world court and they lose; which has been the case five times in the past. Well Canada has filed a claim in the world courts over the soft wood tariffs. And the USA realizes they're going to lose that case as well. So the basics have been reached over a new softwood agreement. What's blocking it is that one billion which was collected and Canada wants back. The problem with the Yanks is that they know if this case goes to the world courts, they will lose this one as well and have to pay back the one billion. So they are trying to heavy hand Canada into relinquishing the one billion dollars. Or how about California who bought electricity form British Columbia then declared the rates to high and tore up the bill. That's what it is all about. So if you were Canadian would you want Americans to own a key vital transportation link with all of Canada. CN and CP certainly own rail in the States, and Americans own rail in Canada. But none of the rail is super critical. Can you image the outcry if CN tried to buy BNSF and run it from Canada. You have to realize the very existence of CP was anti-american. The problem was how do you keep Americans from crossing into Canada and snatching land, then have a giant territorial dispute. The solution, create a trans-Canada Rail Road that would link all of Canada, and also - more importantly by its presence - declare sovereignty over its land. When CP first joined Canada together, there was nothing... nothing... out west. It was CN and CP that did a massive immigration program, bringing in immigrants to help establish towns and cities across Canada so that there was a reason to have a rail road. Think all territorial disputes are over between the USA and Canada. Wrong! Most Canadians and Americans don' t know this, but the boundaries of Alaska are being disputed in what I would call a "soft dispute." By that I mean I don't think either side wants it to go to court as they are afraid they will lose. So what is the dispute? Well the Alaska, Yukon Territory border goes straight up right? Wrong, according to the Americans. Yes sir, you see they insist it takes a radical hard left hand turn into the Northern waters. And why this dispute? Well, you see if Canada has sovereignty over the North as it maintains it does, then the waters that the Russian and American Fleets go through is Canadian water. But if the Americans are correct in their revisionist history, the waters that the American Fleet sails through is American territory. So every once in a while, in a newspaper article that most Canadians and Americans don't understand is some wedding in the middle of nowhere performed. And other than it being cute, what is it doing - its declaring Canadian sovereignty in that area.
[ Can you image the outcry if CN tried to buy BNSF and run it from Canada.] And that, my friend, is EXACTLY what the proposed BNSF/CN merger was all about. It would have been a Canadian corporation, headquartered in Montreal, with the two railroads as subsidiaries. It would have been a lawyers dream! The purpose of which would have been to hide each countries railroad's "sins" in the legal,corporate morass that would have been created. Fortunately there was enough foresight on both the US gov't side and the side of organized labor. Thank the Lord that both Tellier and Krebs are gone. Too many of us on the BNSF had visions of our RR brothers from the "North" crossing the border and taking our jobs, with ABSOLUTELY NO RECIPROCITY!!!!! I am damn glad that "red herring" died!!!! CT
Transportation is security for both countries. I'm willing to live with Canadian ineptitude, inefficiencies, and stupidities, but I don't want American ones. I don't want Canadians paying for poor management policy out of Texas, for instance. And the same for the Americans, transportation is security. You don't want Canadian stupidities, inefficiencies, etc driving your economy. So I'll live with our idiots and you live with yours...lol! As for Tellier, I only pity Bombardier. As for CN headquarters, there were to be two headquarters, the BNSF one and the CN one. My wife taught at a three year nursing school, then the nurses went stupid and decided to shut down all three year nursing programs. So her school became a seperate school under the University of British Columbia (UBC). When I heard this news I knew she was doomed. Why? Well UBC already had a nursing program. So that meant with the addition of the new program, they had two nursing programs, with two presidents, vice presidents, admission counsellors, etc and two graduations. It didn't take a genius to figure out that at some point some higher administrative type would say, why are we duplicating costs. Yup, one day I did get that teary eyed phone call. The same with the two headquarters idea with BNSF?CN, another dumb concept in my estimation and eventually it would have been figured out, and one headquarters closed. And I know which one that would be. [ 27. February 2003, 16:38: Message edited by: rsn48 ]
I can understand your not wanting Canadian railroads being managed from America. Were I in your shoes, I'd get a little "redneck" about it, too. Explain, please, why we should have CP and CN operating railroads in our country all the way to the Gulf of Mexico. I don't say this to stoke flames (not at all), but let's look at things from both sides- what do former Soo Line, Milwaukee Road and Illinois Central employees feel about receiving marching orders from Toronto or Montreal? Could Bubba Ray down in Mississipi handle taking orders from some French-speaking Canuck, or could Doug MacKenzie tolerate following the cowboy yahoos from Ft. Worth? (No offense meant at all- trying to prove a point here). Nah- didn't think so..... As I see it, were the Canadian government to make their plans more favorable for CN and CP, you would see the beginning of the last round of Class 1 mergers. Regardless of where control would come from, it's obvious neither you nor I care for such an outcome. The sight of BNSF diesels rolling into Montreal on a regular basis is probably as nauseating as CN power racing through New Mexico every day. How big is TOO big, and who controls what? Methinks the boys in Ottawa have the right idea, and a permanent red block on the final round of megamergers is needed. Or, some of us have such deep feelings about our country(ies) that a North Amercian megamerger is a horrifying thought.
Well, I've grabbed one of Dane's Canadian Track Side Guide and in the front it lists every RR in Canada. So I will list the American owned ones: 1) Burlington Northern Santa Fe - operates into Vancouver and owns track in Vancouver 2) Burlington Northern Santa Fe (Manitoba) - owns freight terminals and yard facilities in Winnipeg and has trackage rights over CN between Winnipeg and the international boundary at Emerson 3) Cape Breton & Central Nova Scotia Railway (owned by RailAmerica) 4) Carlton Trail Railway - owned by Onmitrax 5) Central Western Railway - owned by RailAmerica 6) CSX - freight service in Southern Ontario and Quebec 7) E & N railway owned by Rail America - but my understanding is that Rail America just abandoned the E & N... could be wrong on that. 8) Goderich-Exeter Railway - owned by Rail America 9) Hudson Bay Railway - owned by Onitrax 10) Lakeland & Waterways Railway - owned by RailAmerica 11) Mackenzie Northern Railway - owned by RailAmerica 12) Okanagan Valley Railway - owned by Omnitrax 13) Ottawa Valley Railway - owned by RailAmerica 14) Southern Ontario Railway - owned by RailAmerica It is my understanding that RailAmerica is the third largest Rail Road in Canada, used to be BC Rail. There is still a strong rumour that Omnitrax would buy BC RAil. If this rumour comes true, then Omnitrax will become the third largest RR in Canada, and RailAmerica will be forth. The reason the Omnitrax rumour is strong is that BNSF receives around 60 cars a day from BC Rail. The feeling is that if CN takes over BC Rail, they will desist running into North Vancouver (they already have track there) and shut down Squamish and just run the upper 2/3's of BC Rail. This will halt the 60 cars a day BNSF is receiving. It is also my understanding the BNSF is a silent partner of Omnitrax. Both sides own lots on either side of the border. As for Americans taking orders from Canadians... just ask the Seagram's employees what its like. I don't think it would be any different than American owned companies in Canada, telling Canadian workers what to do. As for co-operation, both sides have people who are all for it, and those who would be happy closing the border down. If that happened, it would be disaster for both countries. More than a billion dollars of day flows between the borders, a million dollars a minute. Ever wonder why the dual Canadian/American flags disappeared off of the CP engines? When I first saw them, I thought what a great idea. Yep, Americans were upset with an American/Canadian flag flying together. [ 27. February 2003, 20:58: Message edited by: rsn48 ]
I was talking to a buddy of mine who just retired from CN management. I was talking about American owned RR in Canada, and Canadian RR in the states. One thing new I learned was that CN shareholders are 80% American.
