CGC review

[westernvicki]

There are a lot of takers in the farm sector,
they may make or take grain but do not make a difference for their industry. They can be on a board or not.

I note that Larry has asked for sales reporting for farmers since the CWB went. He was a major critic of Ritz for not doing this when the CWB was disbanded. And he was right. We were at the time in the love in of the CWB being gone and did not have the foresight to ask for rules that would work for us.


This year as the majority of grain was sold much lower than current bids, you can multiply the impact of information on your bottom line, and most of you too embarrassed to admit you likely listened to a higher paid adviser who read it all wrong.

Anyone listening to Weber will know that he called the Great Grain Robbery end of October. You likely still have canola left if you listened to Weber, we do.


Most never caught on and still more will not admit he was right, because it means that who they listened to was so very wrong and missed the signs.

A maker is someone who makes a difference. For farming to remain a successful industry requires respect of those who give a shit enough to try. Few will stand up in a room and defend their opinion of what they believe is right. Lots not on that list farmers, farm advisors, and industry voices won't say boo, but gladly will take the job of representing us on countless committees nationally and globally.

Go along to get along.. not a hope in hell of getting sales reporting, wanna bet.

[wmoebis]

Totally agree, mandatory sales reporting and contract delivery issues could all be under control of Advocacy office that operated independently of CGC and had legal powers to enforce the ACT. IE: RCMP don't make the traffic laws they enforce them.

The CGC has had some of those powers but has not been enforcing. I think it was the late Paul Beingessner that refer to the CGC as a watch dog with no teeth. Then when SEC 9 was repealed by Ritz in 2010 it got worse.

[furrowtickler]

There are a lot of takers in the farm sector,
they may make or take grain but do not make a difference for their industry. They can be on a board or not.

I note that Larry has asked for sales reporting for farmers since the CWB went. He was a major critic of Ritz for not doing this when the CWB was disbanded. And he was right. We were at the time in the love in of the CWB being gone and did not have the foresight to ask for rules that would work for us.


This year as the majority of grain was sold much lower than current bids, you can multiply the impact of information on your bottom line, and most of you too embarrassed to admit you likely listened to a higher paid adviser who read it all wrong.

Anyone listening to Weber will know that he called the Great Grain Robbery end of October. You likely still have canola left if you listened to Weber, we do.


Most never caught on and still more will not admit he was right, because it means that who they listened to was so very wrong and missed the signs.

A maker is someone who makes a difference. For farming to remain a successful industry requires respect of those who give a shit enough to try. Few will stand up in a room and defend their opinion of what they believe is right. Lots not on that list farmers, farm advisors, and industry voices won't say boo, but gladly will take the job of representing us on countless committees nationally and globally.

Go along to get along.. not a hope in hell of getting sales reporting, wanna bet.

Agree , but just a bit of devils advocate here ... not everyone can hold till this time of year . Some can , most cant . If your running a commercial farm only with no outside income , grain sales need to pay bills .
The problem was , as Larry pointed out , the market was out of touch . Most of us knew that , and that was the unfortunate part , but after 2 tough harvests , some grain needed to move .

[CptnObvious]

Good enough reason for me to ask for my checkoff money back. What irritates me the most is they don't mention that spending at the AGM or mention the review...and the fact they don't think farmers can think for themselves...highlights what is wrong with commissions.

You think you pay a check-off to the CGC?

[bucket]

You think you pay a check-off to the CGC?

Nope ...but i pay a checkoff to Saskwheat who goes out and hires a CWB hack who writes a report with checkoff money...the guy had years at the CWB to engage with government to make changes ...he did nothing but operate in a cloak of secrecy / dome of silence...

So where did the 130 million dollar slush fund the CGC has come from????

[bucket]

There are a lot of takers in the farm sector,
they may make or take grain but do not make a difference for their industry. They can be on a board or not.

I note that Larry has asked for sales reporting for farmers since the CWB went. He was a major critic of Ritz for not doing this when the CWB was disbanded. And he was right. We were at the time in the love in of the CWB being gone and did not have the foresight to ask for rules that would work for us.


This year as the majority of grain was sold much lower than current bids, you can multiply the impact of information on your bottom line, and most of you too embarrassed to admit you likely listened to a higher paid adviser who read it all wrong.

Anyone listening to Weber will know that he called the Great Grain Robbery end of October. You likely still have canola left if you listened to Weber, we do.


Most never caught on and still more will not admit he was right, because it means that who they listened to was so very wrong and missed the signs.

A maker is someone who makes a difference. For farming to remain a successful industry requires respect of those who give a shit enough to try. Few will stand up in a room and defend their opinion of what they believe is right. Lots not on that list farmers, farm advisors, and industry voices won't say boo, but gladly will take the job of representing us on countless committees nationally and globally.

Go along to get along.. not a hope in hell of getting sales reporting, wanna bet.

Well said. I too was caught up in the rah rah of the open market. To my dismay and embarrassment I now have to put my hand up to admit that as a farmer thought they, Ritz and minions, had the no brainer parts of the open market taken care of.

Things like sales reporting and more transparency in the industry. Things that farmers to the south of us in the states have had for nearly 50 years...

The lesson learnt was to sit in meetings and ask questions and make sure my farm business interests are heard...because I see very few standing up for my interests...

Larry Weber is one guy that has farmer interests at the forefront...If government even listened to one tenth of what he knows , we would all be better off.

[chuckChuck]

https://www.manitobacooperator.ca/news-opinion/news/cgc-review-started-quietly-amid-suspicion-in-2019-then-sidelined/ https://www.manitobacooperator.ca/news-opinion/news/cgc-review-started-quietly-amid-suspicion-in-2019-then-sidelined/

CGC review started quietly amid suspicion in 2019, then sidelined
By Allan Dawson
Reporter

Published: January 21, 2021
News

Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada (AAFC) quietly began its review of the Canada Grain Act and the Canadian Grain Commission (CGC) in March 2019.

The kickoff was an AAFC briefing to members of the Grains Roundtable, which represents a cross-section of the grain sector.

There was no ministerial announcement or news release, but shortly after it was mentioned in the budget, stating the review would “address a number of issues raised by the Canadian grain industry, including redundant inspections and issues within the current grain-classification process that unnecessarily restrict Canadian grain exporters.”

Both issues had been, and continue to be, raised by the WGEA, the Alberta Wheat and Barley Commissions and Cereals Canada.

The budget’s wording prompted some to speculate AAFC started out with a pro-company bias.

Reliable sources at the time said some CGC staff were shocked the government used the word “redundant” with respect to its role in outward inspections, the CGC’s main source of funding.

They also said then assistant CGC chief commissioner Doug Chorney and commissioner Lonny McKague, both farmers, were sidelined from the review, while then chief commissioner Patty Miller pushed the pro-grain company agenda with AAFC.

Miller denied that in a March 18, 2019 interview, but acknowledged she and the other commissioners had a difference of opinion.

However, there were other indications of a pro-grain company agenda. Speaking to a Canadian Federation of Agriculture meeting in Vancouver in September 2018, AGT president and CEO Murad Al-Katib called for changes to the system and said they had support from Miller, who retired in 2020.

The Canada Grain Act is “archaic and left over from a Canadian Wheat Board centralized marketing system,” Al-Katib told the meeting.

“It doesn’t make sense today. Did you know that today I cannot buy durum wheat in my own railway that I own wholly in Saskatchewan, put it in my own rail cars, transport them to a terminal that I own in Thunder Bay and ship it to my own factory in Turkey that I produce pasta in without the Canadian Grain Commission regulating my grain exports… I can’t be part of a global value chain without being regulated by the Canadian government.”

When Saskatchewan farmer Norm Hall told Al-Katib the CGC was created to protect farmers, Al-Katib replied:

“We actually have the chief commissioner (Miller) supportive and requesting us to consider that type of modernization.”

On April 2, 2019 Michelle Bielik, AAFC’s director of the Crop and Supply Chain Policy Division in the Strategic Policy Branch, told a Keystone Agricultural Producers (KAP) meeting the review was at a preliminary stage.

“We are right now just gathering our thoughts about how we’re going to conduct our analysis,” Bielik told KAP’s advisory council in Portage la Prairie. “That’s why we want to hear from you about the issues you want to focus on.”

The review didn’t have much of a public profile leading up to the federal election Oct. 21, 2019, nor following it. The review was sidelined when COVID-19 hit Canada hard in March 2020.

The consultation discussion paper AAFC released Jan. 12 to help facilitate feedback on changes to the Canada Grain Act and CGC doesn’t refer to outward inspections as “redundant,” but it does ask the following questions: “Are there ways that the official inspection and weighing system, which includes oversight and service delivery of inspection and weighing, should be reformed? If so, how and why? What are the best roles for the CGC and how can the inspection system maintain official Canadian grain-grading standards while addressing the need for a cost-effective and responsive system?”

[chuckChuck]

It's no secret that the grain companies want to write all the rules when it comes to the grain trade. They always act in their own self interest. That's why farmers need an independent CGC to offset the power grain companies have over farmers. Numerous farmers have complained loudly about how the grain trade in Canada has little transparency compared to the US. Weakening the role of the CGC will not give farmers more transparency nor influence.

Read more: https://www.manitobacooperator.ca/news-opinion/news/grain-act-grain-commission-review-revived/ https://www.manitobacooperator.ca/news-opinion/news/grain-act-grain-commission-review-revived/

[ajl]

In today's grain marketing world, the CGC has become largely irrelevant. Their only function, like most government agencies is to skim off the top to fund large salaries and in turn generate taxes for the government. There is little difference between bottom and top grades in price and other factors such as FN, which the CGC was caught fall footed on are playing a role. As far as the farmer is concerned, might as well disband the CGC. Industry does as it wants today anyways and that does not change if the CGC is disbanded.

[CptnObvious]

The difference between the CGC inspecting grain and private inspectors hired by the terminal doing it is the same as the difference between the R.C.M.P. and Commissionaires. I want the big boys( girls...) guaranteeing the quality of my product to the rest of the world.

[bucket]

The difference between the CGC inspecting grain and private inspectors hired by the terminal doing it is the same as the difference between the R.C.M.P. and Commissionaires. I want the big boys( girls...) guaranteeing the quality of my product to the rest of the world.

Read the WP where Wade Sobowich of the WGEA stated something to the effect ....its no longer your grain when it passes through the grates at the elevator driveway...

[CptnObvious]

Well said. I too was caught up in the rah rah of the open market. To my dismay and embarrassment I now have to put my hand up to admit that as a farmer thought they, Ritz and minions, had the no brainer parts of the open market taken care of.

Things like sales reporting and more transparency in the industry. Things that farmers to the south of us in the states have had for nearly 50 years...

The lesson learnt was to sit in meetings and ask questions and make sure my farm business interests are heard...because I see very few standing up for my interests...

Larry Weber is one guy that has farmer interests at the forefront...If government even listened to one tenth of what he knows , we would all be better off.

Enabling farmers to function competently in an open market was never part of the Ritz/Harper plan. They still do not consider the question.

It used to cost 1/8 the value of my wheat to get it from my truck to a ship under the CWB. It now costs 1/3. THAT was the plan.

[bucket]

Enabling farmers to function competently in an open market was never part of the Ritz/Harper plan. They still do not consider the question.

It used to cost 1/8 the value of my wheat to get it from my truck to a ship under the CWB. It now costs 1/3. THAT was the plan.

And O'Toole appointed a couple of Ritz minions to the ag committee....Rood and Steinley...they may as well be liberals.

[Rareearth]

Has anyone noticed that the exporters, Viterra etc don’t pay or have a fee schedule in their contracts for missing the delivery period on the contract.

There should be stiff penalties!

[bucket]

Has anyone noticed that the exporters, Viterra etc don’t pay or have a fee schedule in their contracts for missing the delivery period on the contract.

There should be stiff penalties!

Who is responsible for regulating or changing that?

As a farmer , I know I can't change anything on a contract.