Farmer Todd Hames of the Alberta Wheat Commission (AWC) chair, Cargill’s Jennifer Marchand vice-chair, farmer Robert Misko of the Manitoba Crop Alliance (MCA) treasurer and Richardson’s Jean-Marc Ruest secretary.

“I am honoured and appreciative of the board’s support to serve as chair for a second year,” Hames said in a news release. “Cereals Canada’s ability to adapt and pivot to the changing global needs showcases the organization’s ability to be responsive and effective.”

Cereals Canada, a Winnipeg-based umbrella association, represents Canada’s cereals value chain with a focus on Canadian cereal sales.

Members include farmer-funded cereals groups, seed and chemical companies, grain companies and cereal processors.

The Canadian National Millers Association, which has represented Canadian cereal millers for more than 100 years, is Cereals Canada’s newest member bringing total membership to 21. (See list below)

Two new directors joined Cereals Canada’s 16-member board. Greg Sears (AWC) and Gregg Fotheringham (MCA) replaced outgoing directors Hannah Konschuch (AWC) and Drew Baker (MCA).

Half of Cereals Canada’s board consists of farmers and the other half are from industry.

The board’s governance committee members are Jake Leguee, Saskatchewan Wheat Development Commission (SWDC), Henry Van Ankum, Grain Farmers of Ontario, Richard Wansbutter, Viterra and Adam Dyck, Warburtons.

The Finance and Audit Committee members are Greg Sears from AWC, Glenn Tait with SWDC, Trish Jordan of Bayer and Darren Amerongen of Parrish & Heimbecker.

Cereals Canada members

• Alberta Wheat Commission
• Atlantic Grains Council
• BASF Canada
• Bayer Inc.
• BC Grain Producers Association
• Bimbo Canada
• Cargill
• Corteva Agriscience
• G3 Canada Limited
• Canadian National Millers Association
• Producteurs de Grains du Quebec
• Grain Farmers of Ontario
• Manitoba Crop Alliance
• North West Terminal Ltd.
• Parrish and Heimbecker
• Richardson International
• Saskatchewan WheatDevelopment Commission
• Syngenta Canada
• Viterra Inc.
• Warburtons
• Saskatchewan Winter Cereals Development Commission

The post Cereals Canada’s executive committee unchanged appeared first on Manitoba Co-operator.

The film showing how their wheat was grown, harvested and shipped had high production values for the time, and audiences packed community halls and church basements to learn about farming in Canada and how Canadian wheat was best for making bread.

But there was a problem. Consumers don’t buy wheat. They buy bread. Shoppers who had seen the film would visit the local bakery and ask for a loaf made with Canadian wheat. This annoyed bakers, who don’t buy wheat either. They buy flour. Bakers complained to the millers, who do buy wheat, and they aren’t interested in specifying where it comes from or in saying that Canadian wheat is better. That wouldn’t go over well with British farmers.

Lesson learned. If you are in the wheat business, don’t annoy the customer.

That’s an appropriate lesson for the impending merger of the Canadian International Grains Institute (Cigi) and Cereals Canada. Cigi’s main role has been to show customers how to use Canadian wheat and other crops in the products consumed in their countries. It’s also worked with Canadian industry staff and farmers to show them what customers are looking for when they buy grain.

Cereals Canada’s role has been vague. Set up with a board of various industry representatives after the end of the wheat board, it says it “brings a broad and diverse collaboration of partners from all sectors of the cereals value chain.”

Judging by a series of opinion pieces by CEO Cam Dahl, much of the focus seems to be convincing consumers that Canadian grain is produced under scientifically safe, modern production practices, and implying that sales are being hindered by customers who object to them.

“Canadians have been food secure through the pandemic because of modern agriculture that includes pesticides, chemical fertilizers, precision agriculture and science-based regulations,” says Dahl’s latest opinion piece.

“Further, Canada needs to use this time of a resurgence in the understanding of the value of science and research to push for a greater scientific foundation of the world’s trading system. After all, it is not just Canadian consumers who depend on the resiliency of a science-based food supply chain, but consumers in every country… ”

To their credit, Cereals Canada and Dahl have promoted the “Keep it Clean” initiative, encouraging farmers not to use products which can cause problems with buyers. But the new merged organization needs to continue to reinforce Cigi’s main purpose, which is to show buyers how Canadian grain can make the products that their consumer customers want. Given that some of those consumers do have concerns about some farming practices, the buyers don’t want to see public statements about how ingredients are made with “pesticides, chemical fertilizers, precision agriculture and science-based regulations.”

That’s an implied tag line of “Canadian grain — it won’t hurt you,” which is not appropriate for an organization for promoting sales. Dealing with real or imagined trade restrictions is the job for government, or industry organizations such as the Canada Grains Council, not for an organization working with customers.

The post Opinion: ‘Canadian grain — it won’t hurt you’ appeared first on Manitoba Co-operator.

The single biggest degrading factor was mildew affecting 24.7 per cent of the No. 2, 3 and CW Feed that was assessed.

CGC data shows 17.1, 5.9 and 1.7 per cent of the No. 2, 3 and CW Feed wheat was downgraded by mildew — a problem that often shows up after wet harvest conditions.

Fusarium-damaged kernels was the second most common degrading factor downgrading 12.9 per cent of CWRS wheat grading No. 2, 3 and CW Feed wheat.

Severely sprouted and sprouted ranked as the third and fourth degrading factors in CWRS wheat grading No. 2, 3 and Canada Western Feed.

However, the data is based on wheat harvested earlier. Degrading factors may be different in wheat harvested later and has yet to be assessed.

The information was presented at a new crop seminar Nov. 8 in Winnipeg organized by Cereals Canada, the Canadian Grain Commission (CGC) and Canadian International Grains Institute.

This and other information about the quality of Western Canada’s 2019 wheat crop will be shared at similar seminars with customers around the world this fall and early winter.

Farmer presentations key to new crop seminars

Emotion is a better sales tool than facts and figures, according to marketing gurus.

It’s fitting then that before all the technical data about the quality of Western Canada’s 2019 wheat crop is presented to customers at new crop seminars, a western Canadian farmer talks about how and why he grows wheat.

“The producer reviews what drives their cropping decisions and what drives their business in an economically sustainable way,” Cereals Canada president Cam Dahl said during the first new crop seminar in Winnipeg. “That is important because that is not something that’s understood in all the markets we go to.”

Many farmers across the West struggled to get this year’s crop off, delayed by wet weather that also degraded some of the crop.

Farmers attending the seminars will no doubt share that, but also explain the steps they take to ensure the wheat they sell is the best it can be.

“The handling and storage equipment on Canadian farms today is extremely sophisticated,” Dahl told reporters following the seminar. “So I think our ability to condition that crop… whether it is real-time drying or through aeration… with bin sensors, in some cases it’s better than the mills that we’re going to. So I’m not going to underestimate farmers’ ability to condition and keep that grain.”

The post Mildew top degrading factor for CWRS grades No. 2, 3 and CW Feed appeared first on Manitoba Co-operator.

And if you keep reading you’ll learn lots more about the recently retired CEO of Cigi — the Canadian International Grains Institute — and her auspicious agricultural career that didn’t start on a farm.

It’s May 22 — her second to last day on the job — Buth greets a reporter with her usual smile and calm demeanour in her corner office on the 10th floor of the Canadian Grain Commission Building just metres away from Portage and Main.

How she got here in August 2014 was circuitous and not part of any grand plan.

“It’s like following a thread,” said Buth, who loves working with fabric, including weaving.

“Sometimes when I change jobs, it’s a matter of a door opens and you go through it. So it’s taking those opportunities. When something comes up you say, ‘yes, I am going to do that rather than holding back.’”

From a modest upbringing, Buth, a former senator and president of the Canola Council of Canada, pursued her youthful fascination with nature and science, never expecting or planning to reach such heights. It’s obvious from what she accomplished Buth capitalized on her intelligence and work ethic.

“I started work at the age of 15 at Eaton’s fancy meat department as a meat wrapper,” Buth said. “I lied about my age. I put myself through university.

“But my first job in university (while working on a master of science degree in entomology) was with the City of Winnipeg in the Insect Control Branch and I managed the bug line.”

City kid

Buth didn’t grow up on a farm. Her parents farmed north of Beausejour near a community called Greenwald, but moved in 1950 during the great Red River flood, to Vernon, B.C.

“So no farm, although I did an aptitude test at one time and it said I should either be in the military or a farmer,” Buth said.

Buth’s favourite times were playing by the creek in summer.

“As a kid I had an insect collection,” Buth said. “As a kid I was pressing plants.

“I was always interested in plants. At the U of W (University of Winnipeg) I got a biology degree but almost all my courses were in botany. I really had an interest in plants and then in insects.”

Buth’s father died when she was 12. She and her family moved back to Winnipeg, living in the Wolseley neighbourhood when it was a working-class part of the city rather than the trendy spot it’s since become.

After earning a bachelor of science degree in 1976, Buth completed a master of science degree in entomology at the University of Manitoba in 1982.

After that she was information officer at Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada’s Winnipeg research centre until 1984.

Then Buth attended the University of Saskatchewan’s veterinary college for a year, dropping out after realizing her goal of becoming a researcher meant three more years of vet school, plus three more for a PhD.

From 1985 to 1990 Buth worked for Dow.

“I picked up enough there to become a weeds specialist,” she said, starting in that position with Manitoba Agriculture based in Carman, moving up to be a manager a few years later.

The next stop was the Canola Council of Canada as vice-president of crop production and biotechnology for eight years, followed by another five as president.

Senator Buth

Her next career move was an unexpected one even for one with a wide breadth of experience — an appointment to the Canadian Senate Jan. 6, 2012 by Prime Minister Stephen Harper.

Buth suspects her brief interactions with Harper in 2009 when the council and federal government were negotiating to keep Canadian canola flowing to China played a role in her appointment.

They rubbed shoulders again a year later during a helicopter tour to view flooded Saskatchewan farms.

After playing telephone tag with the Prime Minister’s Office’s director of appointments for a few days they connected. Buth thought he might want some suggestions for possible appointees. She was surprised when he popped the question: “‘The prime minister would like to know if you’d be interested in being a senator,’” Buth said. “And I just thought this is crazy. I took a couple of days to think about it. Again, part of that is a door opens and I thought maybe I could make a difference in agriculture.”

Twenty months later Buth resigned even though by law she could’ve kept the position until age 75.

There were several reasons. One was the partisanship in the upper house.

In addition, several senators, including Mike Duffy, were accused of cheating on their expense accounts.

It wasn’t a pleasant time to be a senator.

“What I found hard was the constant criticism you get from taxpayers who don’t feel there is value in the Senate,” Buth said. “You were constantly defending yourself.

“I think what led me to leave more was I didn’t feel like I could make much of a tangible difference,” she said, adding she likes to be able to tackle problems immediately.

“The Senate is much more of a long-term (process),” Buth said.

Despite its many critics, Buth continues to believe the Senate plays an important role in Canadian democracy, but would be even more effective if elected, she said, adding that’s unlikely any time soon as that would require a constitutional change.

On to Cigi

Knowing Cigi was changing post-Canadian Wheat Board, and that then CEO Earl Geddes was retiring, Buth applied for the job and got it.

Cigi, created in 1972 to train foreign customers how to better use Canadian field crops, had been funded by the wheat board and federal government.

Now Cigi’s funding boils down to what its grain company-members agree to kick in, matched by farmers through their provincial wheat organization checkoffs.

The current budget is $7.5 million a year, including, $2 million from the federal government.

“When I started at Cigi I went to see each of the grain companies’ executives and I said, ‘What value does Cigi bring to you? What would happen if we didn’t exist?’ I wanted to know if they had thought about it,” Buth said. “I think all of them said Cigi has value and you would notice it if it were gone right away.”

Buth led Cigi through a priority-setting process, resulting in a renewed focus on wheat, reflecting where most of the funding comes from.

Cigi employs 28 people, down from 42. Some of that was through attrition, but there were layoffs too.

“Those decisions are extremely difficult — letting people go — and it’s the worst part of any job I’ve had,” Buth said. “It eats away at you because staff here are extremely dedicated… ”

Cigi and Cereals Canada, which share many of the same members, are currently looking at merging. Buth’s advice to her successor is to listen.

“You really have to listen to what your members are saying and you really have to ask the hard questions, because you better know what’s happening,” she said.

Future plans

There are at least two things Buth knows she’ll be doing in retirement: getting married in July and learning to sail this summer at Lake of the Woods.

Asked if she might do some consulting, Buth firmly replied: “I hope not.

“I just think all I’m going to do is spend the next six to nine months figuring it out. You might never hear from me again.”

Buth will also remain chair of the Manitoba Agriculture Research and Innovation committee, which makes recommendations to the provincial agriculture minister on research projects to fund.

“I’m not afraid (of retirement) but I think I have a certain amount of apprehension about what is it that I want to do. The upside of that is I can explore anything,” she said.

As for mosquito ovaries, well that’s always a conversation starter at cocktail parties.

Buth’s master’s degree was on mosquitoes that spread equine encephalitis.

“I dissected millions of ovaries,” she said.

“You just open their abdomen with two little needles and the ovaries just fall out because the whole purpose of a mosquito is reproduction. There’s not much in there except ovaries. They are very small. Then you put them under a microscope.”

Why is the weevil Buth’s favourite insect?

“Weevils have a long snout and come in different sizes and I just think they are just one of the most comical creatures out there,” Buth said. “They have personality.”

The post JoAnne Buth: a life in agriculture appeared first on Manitoba Co-operator.

“In September 2009 we managed to negotiate with the Chinese to keep the border open on this whole issue,” Buth said in an interview May 22 as she prepared to retire as CEO of the Canadian International Grains Institute (Cigi). “It has been kept open until now. It’s always an opportunity for China to control things. It always was, so we knew this would likely happen at some point.”

China claimed in 2009 Canadian canola seed could introduce a more virulent strain of the blackleg fungus, which affects canola and rapeseed.

Canada and China agreed to jointly study the risk and in the interim the border was to remain open.

China’s canola-crushing plants are near the coast and a long way from its rapeseed-growing regions.

China raised the issue in 2016 and again China agreed to more study.

Canadian government officials have said research shows little risk from Canadian canola.

In March Chinese officials claimed Canadian canola seed imports were contaminated with weeds and plant diseases and stopped buying.

It has been widely believed China’s actions were aimed at pressuring Canada to release Huawei executive Meng Wanzhou being held for extradition to the United States on fraud charges.

China confirmed that last week.

China’s Foreign Ministry said the diplomatic row between Ottawa and Beijing lies entirely with Canada.

“We hope that Canada will take seriously our severe concerns and immediately release Ms. Meng Wanzhou… and actively take substantial measure to push China relations back on track,” Chinese Foreign Ministry spokesman Geng Shuang said.

But Meng’s arrest wasn’t an issue in 2016 or 2009, so what’s behind China’s actions? Could its concerns be legitimate? Is it trying to get dockage levels to one per cent from 2.5 to pay less for canola?

“I don’t know,” Buth said. “What China does only China knows. It’s really puzzling.

“It just seems to be about China wanting control.”

The post Buth unsurprised by China’s Canadian canola ban appeared first on Manitoba Co-operator.

To that end the BCC “will undergo a strategic realignment” with Cereals Canada, the Canadian Malting Barley Technical Centre (CMBTC), and the Brewing and Malting Barley Research Institute (BMBRI) starting Aug. 1.

“The (BCC) board felt it was time to bring in all of the barley value chain in Canada and have them sit down and tell us what’s good, bad or ugly in regards to the barley industry and how it can be made better,” Faye said.

There’s been an ongoing collaboration and now it’s time to formalize the situation, Faye said.

“Our Barley Council of Canada is a very lean operation and we want to keep it that way. We don’t want duplication anywhere.”

The BCC is also getting a new interim executive director, Erin Armstrong, who takes over from retired president and executive director, Phil de Kemp.

Armstrong, formerly Canterra Seeds’ director, of industry and regulatory affairs, has worked in Canadian agriculture for more than 30 years, including 14 years in the malting and brewing industry.

“She has a lot of background in the barley industry to help us put all the agreements we need in place for the formalities making everything come together,” Faye said.

Armstrong was seeking a position for 18 to 24 months, he added.

“The stars all lined up and we said ‘Why not?’

“She really enjoyed the barley industry so it was a good fit for her and a good fit for us.”

More industry collaboration should help get new, agronomically superior malting barley varieties commercialized, Faye said.

“That was one of the other reasons we wanted to tie everybody in with this plan… so we can have a unified approach.”

That will help gain acceptance from maltsters and brewers, both known for their reluctance to change varieties because they know how existing barleys perform.

While this formal agreement seeking greater synergy within the sector doesn’t include amalgamating with Cereals Canada, Faye doesn’t rule that out someday.

“At this point in time it’s more about how do we utilize all the resources in a more efficient manner and be able to save all of our contributors dollars in the end,” he said.

Cereals Canada is also currently working toward merging with the Canadian International Grains Institute.

Some question why barley isn’t under Cereals Canada.

“Wheat is such a dominant crop that barley would be dwarfed by it so we want to make sure barley has its autonomy and not get lost in the big scheme of things…” Faye said.

“But when it comes to market access for wheat, barley or oats on an international scale Cereals Canada has a lot of horsepower there.”

The same applies for other internationally related trade issues, including non-tariff trade barriers and maximum residue limits, Cereals Canada president Cam Dahl said in an interview July 3.

“Really the issues for wheat, if not the same, are very similar for barley so it makes sense to have one set of eyes looking at those kinds of issues… ” Dahl said.

“There are some real opportunities right now for some increased effectiveness and collaboration and I am really pleased to see we’re going to take those steps and go forward and work together and see if there are additional steps we can take going forward.

“This is a good thing. It’s not just a money question. It’s about effectiveness and efficiency.”

The BCC was formed in 2013 after the Harper Conservative government ended the Canadian Wheat Board Aug. 1, 2012. The BCC’s role is to lead Canada’s barley value chain.

It’s funded and governed equally by barley growers through checkoffs collected by provincial barley commissions and companies in the barley business.

The post Canada’s barley sector streamlining for synergy appeared first on Manitoba Co-operator.

For more than a year, the Canadian International Grains Institute, created in 1972 to provide market development and technical support for Canadian wheat and other field crops, and Cereals Canada, which represents the country’s cereals sector, have been considering merging. Cigi could decide on that during its annual meeting this month, says Cereals Canada president Cam Dahl.

“And we (Cereals Canada) have a board meeting at the end of June,” he added in an interview May 23. “I may be able to tell you more at that point.”

But even if Cigi’s and Cereals Canada’s boards approve merging, each organization’s members still have to endorse it, Dahl added. How farmer-members of Cigi and Cereals Canada would be consulted isn’t clear yet.

[INFOGRAPHIC: Cigi then and now]

“Each of those respective boards still need to decide what they’re doing and then depending on what happens there then the process will be laid out in terms of how the members get to have their say,” Manitoba Wheat and Barley Growers Association (MWBGA) executive director Pam de Rocquigny said in an interview June 6.

Cigi and Cereals Canada share many of the same member-organizations, including farmer-funded provincial wheat groups like the MWBGA, and grain companies.

And both Cigi and Cereals Canada are involved in promoting Canadian grain exports, especially wheat and durum. A merger would cut some operating costs, but more importantly enhance the focus on market promotion, Dahl said.

“So the way you ensure that common focus continues is to have that common board of directors and common mandate and common strategic plan,” he said.

“We are having discussions on what the benefits are of coming together and what a new organization might look like. No decisions have been made on those questions.”

But what impact would merging have on Cigi’s ‘brand?’

Why it matters: During its 45 years of operation Cigi is credited with boosting Canadian grain exports by training foreign millers and bakers to get the most from Canadian crops. Would Cigi be as effective if it’s no longer a standalone institution?

Both Dahl and JoAnne Buth, Cigi’s recently-retired CEO, agree Cigi, like Canadian grain, is highly regarded among international grain buyers, and merger or not, Cigi’s brand needs to be protected.

“There have been virtually no concerns raised by customers — maybe one or two — about Cigi being funded by the grain companies,” Buth said in an interview May 22 just before retiring from the position she took up in August 2014. “I think it has not been an issue at all for customers. Clearly if the amalgamation occurs there needs to be a discussion about how do you maintain the Cigi brand.”

If Cigi continues to provide good service and information to customers, it won’t matter what form Cigi takes, she said.

Cigi is a creature of the Canadian Wheat Board (see sidebar), which the Harper government scrapped Aug. 1, 2012. At that time the CWB, funded by earnings from selling western Canadian wheat and barley destined for export or domestic human consumption, split Cigi’s budget with the federal government. In the early years Ottawa covered 60 per cent of it.

For 40 years Cigi’s was viewed as a quasi-government organization, operating in the same building as the Canadian Grain Commission in downtown Winnipeg, with a reputation as a reliable and independent expert on Canadian grains.

Since 1972 Cigi’s flour mill, bakery, noodle and durum facilities have trained thousands of millers and bakers from around the world, while showing off Canada’s grain handling system and grain quality control. It’s a globally unique model that begins on the breeder’s bench and ends when the Canadian Grain Commission issues its ‘Certificate Final’ guaranteeing the weight and grade of grain loaded on a ship.

In 1997 during its 25th anniversary Cigi reported more than 13,000 people from more than 100 countries had attended one or more of its 410 courses held in Canada and around the world up until that time.

“Cigi is a good news story,” then Cigi chair and CWB commissioner Gordon Machej said in a 1997 interview.

Quantifying Cigi’s contribution is difficult, but the consensus is it’s valuable, Buth said.

“There is no doubt if you ask anybody they support the work that we do…” she said.

As a single-desk seller, the CWB captured whatever benefits came from Cigi’s work. Who gains now in an open market is less clear. Farmers and grain companies do, but by how much?

“The tough part always becomes, what is the return on investment,” Buth said. “So we struggle with that question just like every other… commodity organization struggles with.”

When the CWB disappeared in 2012, a temporary checkoff to fund Cigi and the Canadian Malting Barley Technical Centre was introduced.

In 2017 a 15 cent a tonne wheat checkoff was formalized through the Manitoba Wheat and Barley Growers (MWBGA), Saskatchewan Wheat Development Commission and Alberta Wheat Commission (AWC) to help fund Cigi. All are Cigi members.

In addition seven grain companies — Cargill Canada, G3 Canada, the Inland Terminal Association of Canada, Parrish & Heimbecker, Paterson Grain, Richardson International and Viterra — are Cigi members.

The three wheat groups and three of the seven grain companies — Cargill, Richardson International and Viterra — are also Cereals Canada members.

Cereals Canada’s other members include multinational pesticide/seed developers — Bayer, BASF, Corteva and Syngenta. What, if any affect, would their connection to Cigi have on Canadian grain customers?

Notwithstanding Cigi’s accomplishments, the world has changed. The CWB is gone and Cigi’s funding and governance has changed. The federal government is contributing $2 million a year or about 27 per cent of Cigi’s annual $7.5 million budget, Buth said. The wheat groups and grain companies make up the rest and each have five directors on Cigi’s 10-member board.

Cigi’s priorities have changed too.

“We are much more focused on wheat because we are supported by the wheat grower organizations,” Buth said. “We have been doing less and less pulse work because that is project-by-project based on where we can uptake funds.”

Fourteen Cigi employees were laid off over the last few years cutting total staff to 28 from 42, Buth said.

The post What will become of Cigi? appeared first on Manitoba Co-operator.

While it’s encouraging that reference by Foreign Affairs Minister Chrystia Freeland shows the federal government is aware of the issues caused by rising trade protectionism, some are questioning whether enough is being done to bolster Canada’s ability to respond.

Cam Dahl, president of Cereals Canada, is calling for more commitment to making sure the right skills and expertise are in place.

“I think we need to make sure our regulatory agencies have enough capacity to respond,” he said. “That includes the Market Access Secretariat, the Canadian Food Inspection Agency and the PMRA (Pest Management Regulatory Agency).”

Government regulators need to be proactive too, by working with customers’ regulators, he said.

He cites the example of Peru, a major customer for Canadian wheat that has said it wants to impose restrictions on weed seeds, which would make exporting to that country too risky.

Peruvian regulators are coming to Canada in late summer to learn about Canada’s quality assurance system. The hope is they may rethink their position on weed seeds.

Annual new crop missions are another big part of being proactive, Dahl said. Every fall Cereals Canada, the Canadian Grain Commission and Canadian International Grains Institute visit wheat buyers to tell them about the crop and get feedback.

But it’s also about building relationships, an unsung benefit that flies below the radar.

“Because of the new crop missions we have a really good working relationship with the industry in Peru,” he said. “And when stuff happens those relationships are just incredibly valuable.”

Brian Innes, president of the Canadian Agri-Food Trade alliance and vice-president of public affairs at the Canola Council of Canada (CCC), agrees federal agencies need the resources to engage when trade tensions arise.

“Complacency and isolation are our biggest enemies,” he said. “The world is constantly changing and we need to be vigilant.”

That means Canadian scientists need to be able to talk to their counterparts in other countries, he said. It will require a co-ordinated approach that includes political representatives as well, all going to bat for Canadian industry.

“There’s always a tendency for isolation and that is no recipe for success,” Innes said.

There’s a proven track record of co-operation and collaboration leading to better outcomes for all, he added.

Big guns

Sometimes that approach won’t work and it means taking steps like going to the World Trade Organization (WTO) for a ruling, even though that’s a long process.

It took Canada and Mexico eight years at the WTO to get the U.S. to repeal its country-of-origin labelling (COOL) law that discriminated against Canadian and Mexican pork and beef, for example.

“There is a menu of things that we can do to resolve issues, but it takes commitment, it takes effort, it takes resources,” Dahl said.

“We have a full-time veterinarian in China at our embassy. We’re not aware of the equivalent on the plant side.”

If Canada wants its trading partners to play by the rules, then Canada must make science-based decisions itself, Jean-Marc Ruest, Richardson International’s senior vice-president of corporate affairs and general counsel, said in an interview April 17. That company was the first hit with a ban on its canola shipments to China earlier this year.

Some provincial and municipal government’s have banned pesticides in urban areas, which conflicts with a science-based approach, he said. It might seem like a small thing, but it’s difficult to argue for one thing abroad, while practising another approach at home.

Richardson wants the government to find new tools to resolve trade disputes faster, Ruest said.

Having those tools at the ready will be very important during a trade era so challenging. Nevertheless, Ruest sees room for optimism.

“Our investments are predicated on our long-term view of the industry,” Ruest said. “I don’t think we’ve seen anything up until now that has caused us to change our view on the industry and we will carry on.”

Against this backdrop of bad news, farmers must be more vigilant than ever.

They need to be locking in profits when they can. Meanwhile, it’s expected changes to cash advances may help with short-term cash flow. There’s also talk of an ad hoc program to help finance the purchase of additional grain storage.

Most economists agree trade is good, as it encourages efficient use of resources. The bet is the pendulum will swing back — eventually.

“Complacency and isolation are our biggest enemies. The world is constantly changing and we need to be vigilant.”

“I think we need to make sure our regulatory agencies have enough capacity to respond.”

“Our investments are predicated on our long-term view of the industry.”

The post Stuck in the middle on world trade appeared first on Manitoba Co-operator.

I am currently part of the delegation that is focused on Canada’s leading durum markets including Morocco, Algeria and Italy. It is not an easy time for durum growers today, with durum prices well below the cost of production.

The primary goal of the missions is to inform our top customers about the quality of the 2018 harvest and how they can expect Canadian wheat and durum to perform in their mills, bakeries and plants. The missions are also about maintaining relationships and dialogue with customers, something even more critical when issues arise that impede the free flow of agricultural commodities.

Canadian exports of durum account for approximately 50 per cent of the world’s durum trade. So, when the demand for Canadian exports are down the world price follows. And demand is down in two of our leading markets – Italy and Algeria. In Italy we are seeing the impact of the protectionist country-of-origin labelling laws and the campaign against Canadian durum being run by the Italian farm group Coldiretti. Algeria has focused on its larger-than-normal domestic crop to serve its domestic market – but this durum is not of the same quality as Canadian.

The goal of our trip is to re-enforce the value of Canadian durum in markets that are not buying like they have in the past and to support customers, like Morocco, who remain loyal customers.

I am looking forward to telling a grain farmer’s story to our customers.

The missions give farmers the opportunity to speak directly to our customers, letting them know how the decisions we make on our farms maintain the Canadian brand of clean, consistent, quality wheat.

When the mission visits Italy we will be meeting with customers one on one to help restore the free flow of trade. We will also be meeting with farm groups in Italy that support science-based rules of trade. The issue of Italian country-of-origin labelling for pasta will be discussed as will Italian concerns about pesticide residues.

I will also have the opportunity to talk about the sustainability of modern Canadian agriculture. Canadian farmers have a good story to tell of reducing fuel use, improving soil health, reducing erosion, sequestering carbon and allowing us to produce crops even in drought conditions. At the same time, we are increasing the quality of the crop we deliver into international markets.

The new crop missions include the entire Canadian value chain, that co-operate in customer support and development efforts. The presence of farmers is a critical component, especially in a growing protectionist trade environment.

Scott Hepworth is a fourth-generation producer on his family farm near Assiniboia, and vice-chair of the board of Sask Wheat.

The post Opinion: Farmers’ voices important on crop missions appeared first on Manitoba Co-operator.

When interviewed last week Jean-Marc Ruest, the company’s senior vice-president of corporate affairs, didn’t rule it out but also didn’t leave the impression Canada’s biggest grain company is champing at the bit to do so. Richardson pulled out of the value chain group almost a year ago.

“The overarching concern right at the outset was the value we get for our membership,” Ruest said in an interview Dec. 7. “The price we were asked to pay and the benefit just didn’t line up. It wasn’t a case of making a checklist and once you hit all of those we’re there.”

Most of the Richardson council complaints are covered under its revised priorities. But will it be enough?

The last time Richardson met with the council, it wasn’t convinced.

“The value proposition still wasn’t there for us,” Ruest said. “We still thought what they were asking from us for a membership fee perspective outweighed what we saw as the benefits of the organization.”

The council’s $3.5-million 2019 budget cut should result in a “significant saving” if Richardson was to rejoin, he said.

“It’s laudable to reduce it in that fashion, but you have to take a look at what membership fees are of other like organizations,” Ruest said. “Cereals Canada covers a very complex commodity — wheat — and cereals more generally.”

And its membership fee is much less than the canola council’s, he added.

It cost Richardson around $1 million a year to belong to the canola council, Soy Canada and the Flax Council of Canada, with most of it going to the canola council, he said.

Canola, on average, earns western Canadian farmers more than any other crop. And half of it is processed domestically, contributing even more to the Canadian economy.

Although many had a hand in making canola a success, the canola council is widely lauded for its role. If Richardson remains a non-member is it a ‘free rider?’

“I think we’d be hard pressed to be accused of being free riders in the canola industry,” Ruest said.

“We were among the founding members of the canola council. We had been very long-standing members and funding at very significant levels — I would argue oftentimes excessively in the canola council and the canola industry generally.

“Now going forward, not being members of the canola council, we recognize there will be things we have to do on our own and are prepared to do so on our own given the size of our canola business.”

Canola’s success hadn’t made Richardson complacent, according to Ruest.

“In large part complacency has got us to where we are,” he said.

“You always have to be evolving and looking at reinventing yourself. I think what we had was a long period of unrest, and ultimately we now have an evolution of the canola council, which is a good thing.

“But I think if your starting position is… that there’s an obligation to fund because of past successes… without looking at whether the organization still meets the needs of its members, or offers a proper value proposition to its members, that is very dangerous ground. That’s not the key for the long-term success for an organization.”

Since dropping out of the council, Richardson has increased industry involvement elsewhere.

“We’ve significantly increased our participation in Cigi (Canadian International Grains Institute) and the funding of Cigi,” Ruest said. “We have spent a lot of money in our development farms.”

Richardson has also joined the Canadian Centre for Food Integrity, which defends modern agriculture and reassures wary consumers.

“We’ve invested in a number of areas where we see benefit in the industry,” he said.

“We have to move away from this concept that there’s this obligation for people to fund anything in the industry. It ultimately has to be a situation where the consumer of the service or the funder sees the value and is comfortable with the amount being asked. A sense of pressuring doesn’t get you very far in the long term.”

The post Will Richardson International rejoin the Canola Council? appeared first on Manitoba Co-operator.