Russia had threatened to quit the Black Sea agreement if a list of demands to overcome obstacles to its own grain and fertilizer exports was not met by May 18. The Kremlin said on Thursday it had extended the agreement because some results from talks had given it “certain hopes” but more progress needed to be made.

The U.N. and Turkey brokered the deal for an initial 120 days in July last year to help tackle a global food crisis that has been aggravated by Moscow’s invasion of Ukraine, one of the world’s leading grain exporters.

The deal had ground to a halt on Wednesday after the last authorized ship left a Ukrainian port.

Officials from Russia, Ukraine, Turkey and the U.N. make up a Joint Coordination Centre (JCC) in Istanbul, which implements the pact. They authorize and inspect ships. No new vessels had been authorized since May 4, which Ukraine blamed on Russia.

The JCC authorized three new vessels on Thursday to travel to the Ukrainian ports of Odesa and Chornomorsk, said deputy U.N. spokesperson Farhan Haq. A third port — Pivdennyi (Yuzhny) — is also covered by the Black Sea deal.

“While we welcome this partial resumption of inbound movement activity, we call on the parties to ensure that the authorization of new vessels is done for all three ports to make use of capacity and meet industry demands,” Haq told reporters.

Further talks

U.N. Secretary-General Antonio Guterres said on Wednesday he hoped a comprehensive agreement could now be reached to improve, expand and extend the Black Sea export deal.

Haq said there could be a meeting of officials from Ukraine, Russia, Turkey and the U.N. on Friday or early next week, but the level of representation was still being discussed.

“Ultimately, it’s great news that the Black Sea grain deal has been renewed, avoiding the worst-case scenario of a cancellation,” Rabobank commodities analyst Paul Joules said.

“Given that Russia has repeatedly expressed its unhappiness with the deal, the extension came as a surprise to the market, and a result, wheat futures declined sharply following the announcement.”

Wheat prices on the Chicago Board of Trade fell nearly two per cent on Thursday to a two-week low of US$6.25-1/2 a bushel after sliding by more than three per cent on Wednesday.

Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov on Thursday called the extension “a qualified result” for Russia and said different scenarios were being worked on regarding easing restrictions on Russia’s state agricultural bank, a main demand of Moscow.

To convince Russia in July to allow Black Sea grain exports, the U.N. agreed at the same time to help Moscow with its own agricultural shipments for three years.

While Russian exports of food and fertilizer are not subject to Western sanctions imposed following the February 2022 invasion of Ukraine, Moscow says restrictions on payments, logistics and insurance have amounted to a barrier to shipments.

The United States has rejected Russia’s complaints.

The challenge of moving grain through Ukraine during the war was highlighted on Thursday by the suspension of rail traffic between Simferopol, capital of the Crimean peninsula, and Sevastopol, after a freight train carrying grain derailed. The derailment was caused by “interference by outsiders,” Crimean railways said in a statement.

— Reporting for Reuters by Nigel Hunt in London and Michelle Nichols at the U.N.

The post Three more ships approved under renewed Black Sea grain deal appeared first on Manitoba Co-operator.

The Western Canadian Wheat Growers Association issued a strongly worded press release on Tuesday after striking picketers targeted Vancouver’s Cascadia grain terminal, co-owned by Viterra and Richardson International.

“A strike is one thing, but to intentionally target a port that is critical to the lives of grain farmers and to the entire Canadian economy is the height of reckless irresponsibility,” association president Gunter Jochum said.

Other commodity groups across the country had more measured responses to PSAC’s strike, which began April 19. On the day workers walked off the job, Keystone Agricultural Producers (KAP) president Jill Verwey weighed in with her organization’s concerns.

“KAP respects the rights of Canadian workers to collective action,” she said in an April 19 press release. “However, this strike could negatively impact grain shipments, resulting in backlogs and restricted cash flow for farmers, as well as increased demurrage costs for grain companies. Restrictions in cash flow could hamper a farmer’s ability to market their remaining 2022 crop as well as their ability to purchase inputs for the 2023 crop year.”

KAP expressed their concerns in writing to both the government of Canada and PSAC prior to the strike action and called on both to make sure adequate contingencies were in place to minimize negative impacts to the grain handling system.

The Agricultural Producers Association of Saskatchewan (APAS) also weighed in, arguing that the supply chain has yet to fully recover from the impacts of COVID-19 and that a prolonged strike could be a major blow to producers.

“Delayed inspections will cause backlogs at ports. Every day a ship must wait means demurrage charges to grain companies, and these costs always make their way to the farmer,” APAS president Ian Boxall said.

To date, shipping hasn’t been dramatically affected. According to Mark Hemmes, president of Quorum Corporation (Canada’s Grain Monitor), while picketing at Cascadia was an inconvenience, it was limited to that location, only lasted a few hours and the impact was not significant.

“It’s the only terminal on the south shore where the entrance to the terminal property is outside the port security gates,” Hemmes said.

Terminals in Thunder Bay and Prince Rupert are also within port security gates, he added, and while some picketers have port passes, he says it’s unlikely they would use them for picketing.

Inspection impacts

However, it’s not just picketing that’s at issue. Sixty-five per cent of Canadian Grain Commission (CGC) staff are on strike right now, and that includes most of the grain inspectors.

“There are some inspection staff that are not in a strike position, but those are limited to some managers in the regions and inspection specialists across the country,” said CGC spokesperson Rémi Gosselin. “So that means that the CGC’s provision of official inspection and certification of grain exports is significantly impacted.”

To minimize the impacts on grain producers, companies and grain exports in general, the CGC has developed contingency plans allowing inspection services to continue. “We’ve allowed grain companies to temporarily collect samples on our behalf and then provide those to us so that we can provide final inspections and certification on grain shipments so that exports meet importing countries requirements,” Gosselin said.

According to Hemmes, those provisions appear to be working.

“So far, the ship-loading stats don’t show anything in the way of delays to vessel departures or loading,” he said. “The CGC contingent that is managing the inspections seems to be keeping up, and between the terminals and the CGC, they have procedures in place that ensure inspection protocols are being maintained.”

However, Hemmes said it’s a heavy burden to bear for those doing the inspections. “Those managers are going to need a holiday when this is done,” he said.

Jochum said he’s pleased with the work the CGC has done to ensure grain continues to move, but he fears that if the strike is prolonged, cracks could begin to show.

Time for a third party?

The wheat growers’ association has long argued that the Canada Grain Act should authorize third-party weighing and inspection of vessels leaving Canadian waters. Jochum said this strike is a good time to revive the issue and could help insulate the supply chain from future disruptions.

The call for third-party inspectors to replace federal inspectors is a hotly debated topic. The issue was raised a number of times during the consultation surrounding the current Canada Grain Act review.

The What We Heard: Canada Grain Act Review Consultations report, released in 2021, said, “While it was unanimous that the CGC should continue to have a role in the setting of quality standards, approximately half of respondents that discussed outward inspection were in favour of the CGC accrediting and overseeing third-party inspection companies rather than performing inspections directly.”

The wheat growers say that third-party inspectors are already in place to meet the demands of overseas customers, and there is therefore no need to duplicate those services.

The other side of the coin notes that the CGC stamp of approval is part of why Canadian grain quality has an excellent reputation.

But Jochum is concerned that if overworked managers are unable to keep up in the face of a prolonged strike, that reputation could be tarnished anyway.

“The problem is they are swamped. They are working seven days a week,” he said. “If this strike goes on for any length of time, eventually someone is going to drop the ball along the way.”

— Don Norman reports for the Manitoba Co-operator from Winnipeg.

The post PSAC federal worker strike could hit at grain transport appeared first on Manitoba Co-operator.

PSAC president Chris Aylward said he was “setting a clock on this round of bargaining” and that a strike would be called if there is no deal by 9 p.m. ET on Tuesday.

The strike would affect federal services and could delay tax refunds since about 35,000 workers at the revenue agency would walk out in the middle of tax filing season. Passport renewals ahead of summer travel could also be delayed.

“Despite some progress at the bargaining table, our members are frustrated that while negotiations drag on, they continue to fall behind,” Aylward told reporters. “We’ve always said from day one, we need wages for our members that will keep up with inflation.”

PSAC has been in collective bargaining for a new contract since 2021. Tax agency workers initially sought a pay bump of more than 30 per cent over three years, and others are asking for 13.5 per cent over three years. Inflation peaked at 8.1 per cent last year.

Aylward said the offers received so far had fallen short. Prime Minister Justin Trudeau said he was hopeful a deal would be reached to avert a strike.

“There have been constructive advances and offers and we’re very hopeful that we’re going to be able to resolve this, but it’s at the bargaining table that these things happen and we will continue to do that be there in good faith and work on trying to resolve this for all Canadians,” Trudeau told reporters.

The strike would also affect 65 per cent of employees at the Canadian Grain Commission, including most inspectors of outbound grain at ports, according to the commission. Canada is a major wheat and canola exporter.

The commission is working on contingency plans with grain companies to ensure that “critical grain exports can continue,” during a strike, spokesperson Remi Gosselin said.

— Reporting for Reuters by Steve Scherer in Ottawa; additional reporting by Rod Nickel in Winnipeg.

The post CGC, other fed workers to strike Tuesday night if no wage deal reached appeared first on Manitoba Co-operator.

Ukraine’s grain exports have proceeded more slowly since a U.N.-brokered deal was extended last week to help ease global hunger, Reuters reported on Thursday.

Vasyl Bodnar, Ukraine’s ambassador to Turkey, attributed the slowdown to uncertainty last week over renewing the deal and also Russia’s refusal to speed up inspections and increase the number of teams from three currently.

Aleksey Erkhov, Russia’s ambassador, said Russia “strictly complies with its obligations” under the grain export deal, which requires parties to form three inspection teams.

“Based on this, the number and composition of the Russian delegation to the JCC were established,” he said, adding that Russia sends its representatives to one or two additional inspection teams daily due to the increased number of vessels.

“This is done as a gesture of goodwill and by reducing the time intended for inspectors to rest in accordance with labour law,” Erkhov said in an emailed response to Reuters’ questions.

A U.N. spokesperson, Ismini Palla, the U.N. spokesperson for the Black Sea Grain Initiative in Istanbul, has said three inspection teams have operated in the last two weeks.

The Joint Coordination Centre (JCC) in Istanbul said on Thursday the delegations were discussing ways to increase the number of successful inspections, adding that it planned to deploy four teams for inspections on Friday.

Since the agreement was extended beyond Nov. 19, no more than five ships a day have departed Ukraine, U.N. data show, down from previous weeks and months when up to 10 departed.

On two of the last four days, only one ship left Ukraine’s ports, while two left on Friday.

In response to Bodnar’s statement that Russian teams were slowing down the checks “probably with intent,” Erkhov said the duration of inspections is determined by objective factors.

The duration “can be reduced only by formalizing the approach to this process. Such an approach, actively promoted by the Ukrainian delegation, is unacceptable for the Russian side,” he added.

The deal, between Moscow and Kyiv that was also brokered by Ankara, unblocked exports that were stalled in Ukraine’s Black Sea ports after Russia’s invasion. It began in July and was extended last week through March, easing global food prices.

Ukraine and Russia are major global grain exporters. They agreed that teams would check the vessels to ensure no barred people or goods are arriving at or departing from Ukrainian ports.

There were between zero to six inspections per day in the seven days to Nov. 23, and eight each on Thursday and Friday, U.N. data show. That compares to five to eight daily inspections in the previous week and up to 11 in the one before. Palla has said vessel flows were affected by past uncertainty over extending the deal, poor weather conditions and a rotation of new staff and inspectors at the JCC.

— Ali Kucukgocmen is a Reuters political correspondent based in Istanbul.

The post Russia denies slowing inspections for Ukraine grain ships appeared first on Manitoba Co-operator.

The CGC on Monday opened up proposed regulatory amendments to an 11-week public consultation period ending Feb. 28, 2022.

The idea came up during consultations held earlier this year as part of the federal review of the Canada Grain Act, the CGC said Monday.

That broader federal review is still ongoing, but CGC chief commissioner Doug Chorney said Monday that the commission wants to take concerns raised by the grain sector in those consultations and respond “quickly” in areas where it can do so within the confines of the current Grain Act.

The CGC’s proposal, as described Monday, doesn’t yet list an exact time window in which farmers would be able to trigger the dispute resolution process.

As they’ve been proposed so far, the changes to the “Subject to Inspector’s Grade and Dockage” process would “clarify the time period over which a producer is entitled to exercise their right” to do so, “including a period after delivery.”

In a document in mid-August laying out the responses it got from the grain sector during Grain Act consultations, the federal government said “many respondents” found that the current grade and dockage dispute process was “not appropriate.”

Farmers who disagree with a CGC-licensed primary elevator’s assessment of their grain today have the right under the Grain Act to ask for a sample to be sent to the CGC for a binding decision on a delivery’s grade and dockage.

However, the process today also requires that a farmer has to request that binding determination right at the time of delivery.

And, as the CGC pointed out Monday, “grain delivery and handling processes have changed. Producers are often not present when their grain is delivered to the licensed primary elevator. Third parties, such as commercial truck drivers, are increasingly being hired to deliver grain into the licensed elevator system.”

In its consultations, the federal government said, “many suggested that somewhere between five to 14 business days was an appropriate window of eligibility.”

That wider window, the government said, “would provide producers with adequate time to receive the grade and dockage result, compare to on-farm samples, and decide whether to access binding determination.”

The CGC’s proposed amendments to sections 34 and 36 of the Canada Grain Regulations would also clarify that producers can dispute an elevator operator’s grade and dockage assessment “even if they are not present at the time of delivery.”

The amendments would also require that samples be retained for seven days minimum, “or until an agreement on grade and dockage has been reached between the elevator and the producer.”

Also, those samples “would no longer need to be taken in the presence of the producer, unless the producer requires it.”

Federal Agriculture Minister Marie-Claude Bibeau, in the CGC’s release Monday, hailed the proposed regulatory changes, saying they’d be “an important first win for grain farmers, in response to the feedback we received during the Canada Grain Act review consultations.”

‘Other classes’

All that said, the CGC’s proposal, if it goes through, may not necessarily cover all the changes farmers had sought to “Subject to Inspector’s Grade and Dockage” during those Grain Act consultations.

For example, the government said in August, “many” respondents want to see an expansion of the quality characteristics eligible for such assessments.

That’s because grain contracts are “increasingly specifying non-grade factors” such as deoxynivalenol (DON) level and falling number for wheat. Respondents said farmers would thus get “better protection against disputes related to the contract specifications.”

Also, respondents to the Grain Act consultations said they’d like to see the right to access binding determination also include “other classes of CGC licensees” such as processing elevators and grain dealers.

There’ve been more processing facilities going up on the Prairies in recent years, farmers said in the consultations, and more such plants are on the way. Thus, the government said, farmers expect that “a further proportion of deliveries will likely shift away from primary elevators to process elevators.” — Glacier FarmMedia Network

The post Farmers may get time to dispute grain grade, dockage appeared first on Manitoba Co-operator.

The TSB on Thursday said its investigation, launched in early July, “has not revealed any evidence to link railway operations to the fire” on June 30 that destroyed “the majority of the structures” in downtown Lytton, B.C., about 160 km southwest of Kamloops.

Thus, unless new information turns up to show that a “TSB-reportable” event took place, “no further work will be performed and no TSB investigation report will be produced,” the agency said.

Apart from traffic halted by damage to Canadian National Railway’s (CN) rail bridge at Lytton, the June 30 fire led to a temporary halt in rail traffic through the area.

Tighter inspections and slower speed limits then followed in July for Class 1 railways’ trains rolling through any areas in Canada deemed to be at “extreme” fire risk.

Those rules — which apply to both CN and Canadian Pacific Railway (CP) — were put in place in July by order of federal Transport Minister Omar Alghabra, and remain in place until the end of this month.

According to the TSB’s report Thursday, the fire in the late afternoon of June 30 was first reported near Mile 98.14 of CN’s Ashcroft subdivision, just west of Lytton, and “grew rapidly due to the extreme hot and dry conditions combined with high-velocity winds.”

The last train through that area passed by about 18 minutes before the fire was reported — a loaded CP coal train of 157 cars, operated by a CN crew, as per a “directional running agreement” between the two railways — travelling at about 40 km/h with “low to moderate throttle,” the TSB said.

The TSB sent its investigator to the area on July 9, based on information from RCMP and B.C. Wildfire Service (BCWS) — and also “in light of the presence of rolling stock in the immediate vicinity of the fire within minutes of the fire first being reported.”

However, the agency said, its inspection of the off-loaded train in Burnaby found no signs of “hot bearings, burnt brake heads, built-up tread (or) other potential fire-creating causes.”

The TSB said it also confirmed with CN and CP that no rail grinding activities or other track work had taken place in the area that day or in the days before the June 30 fire.

Also, “no anomalies were observed or reported” from the TSB’s interviews with rail workers and maintenance staff in the area, nor in any of the video or data from recorders on the lead and tail-end locomotives.

All three locomotives in the train were also subjected to stationary load testing, in which the diesel engines are cycled up to maximum operating r.p.m., and no sparking was seen from any of the locomotives. The locomotives’ exhaust stacks were also found to be “clear of carbon buildup.”

The BCWS had “expressed interest” in samples of a “black, carbonaceous coal-like substance” found on the west side of the track near Mile 98.14 as a “possible source of ignition” and ran a lab analysis of it, the TSB said.

The TSB also collected samples of the substance and ran its own lab analysis comparing it to samples gathered from a locomotive exhaust stack and a rail grinder vehicle. Spectral results found the three analyzed samples “have little in common.”

With no link found between railway operations and the fire, “further effort (by the TSB) is not warranted” unless some new information shows an incident involving rolling stock took place, the agency said.

That said, the fire is still under investigation by the BCWS, and the RCMP are running a preliminary inquiry “to determine the need for a parallel criminal investigation,” the TSB said.

B.C. RCMP said July 11 their investigation was “looking at all movements and actions of any individuals, vehicle traffic and a southbound freight train that were all in the area around 4:30 p.m.” on June 30.

Two people were confirmed to have died during the fire and the exact circumstances of their deaths were also under investigation, RCMP said.

A Vancouver law firm, Gratl and Co., filed a notice of civil claim in August for a proposed class action lawsuit against both CN and CP over the Lytton fire, with a Lytton resident as its representative plaintiff.

The law firm, on its website, said at the time that while government-led investigations “have yet to conclude,” legal counsel believe “eyewitness evidence, train schedules and the burn pattern converge” to support a claim against the railways. — Glacier FarmMedia Network

The post No evidence trains sparked Lytton fire, TSB says appeared first on Manitoba Co-operator.

“With extreme weather events occurring more severely and frequently in Canada due to climate change, it is important to have an adaptive regulatory system that responds to these new risks,” the government said Sunday in a release.

The new order “will put in place interim measures while (Transport Canada) works with railway companies to incorporate these fire risk reduction measures on a permanent basis into the existing regulatory framework for railway operations in Canada.”

Transport Minister Omar Alghabra’s order, in effect as of midnight PT on Saturday, requires Class 1 railways in Canada — that is, Canadian National Railway and Canadian Pacific Railway — to cut their train speeds wherever air temperature is above 30 C combined with an “extreme” fire danger level.

Specifically, when air temperature is 30 to 32 C and extreme fire danger level is declared, CN and CP must reduce train speeds to 25 miles per hour on track where permitted speeds are between 26 and 35 mph. On track where the allowed speed is 36 mph or faster, trains in those areas must reduce speed by 10 mph.

If air temperature rises to 33 C or higher in extreme fire danger areas, Class 1 trains must cut speeds to 25 mph on track where the permitted speed is 26 to 50 mph, and to 30 mph where permitted track speed is 51 mph or faster.

The order also requires CN and CP, until Oct. 31, to ensure no train runs in areas of extreme fire danger level, unless a train has been inspected in the previous 15 days to ensure the locomotive’s exhaust passages are clear of combustible material.

The “combustible material” includes any oil accumulation or any “carbonaceous deposits” thicker than 1/8 inch (three millimetres).

The order also calls for CN and CP to develop “interim extreme weather fire risk mitigation plans” within 14 days — addressing, “at a minimum,” fire detection, monitoring and response measures. Those plans must be communicated to municipal and other orders of government, including Indigenous governing bodies

The order also requires CN and CP to complete and implement “final extreme weather fire risk mitigation plans” within 60 days from the date of the order.

‘Suppression capacity’

Saturday’s order follows a previous order that halted all trains on CN’s and CP’s subdivisions through the Kamloops, B.C. area over the weekend, ahead of an authorized tour Friday by evacuated residents to the largely-destroyed village of Lytton, about 160 km southwest of Kamloops.

The government, he said Sunday, “remains committed to supporting those affected by the devastating wildfires in British Columbia and will not hesitate to take any safety actions that are necessary to mitigate these risks to public safety and the integrity of railway tracks and infrastructure.”

The new order also puts more onus on CN and CP to watch for fires along tracks on their respective Ashcroft and Thompson subdivisions in the Kamloops area specifically.

Until Oct. 31, if operating when the fire danger level in the area of those subdivisions is deemed extreme, CN and CP must “incorporate the deployment of fire suppression capacity into their operations that will ensure a 60-minute response time to any fires detected along the right of way of the subdivisions.”

That added capacity, the order said, is meant to take steps to “extinguish or control” a reported fire, or to notify the fire service for the area “if the fire cannot be controlled without assistance.”

In those subdivisions, a conductor on any train will be responsible for spotting for fires and reporting any fires or “smouldering areas” to rail traffic control.

Any “vegetation control” work done along those tracks must be followed by “removal of combustible materials,” the order said.

CN and CP must also make sure “at least 10” fire detection patrols are run on those subdivisions every 24 hours, “unless a train has not operated on the relevant subdivision for a period of at least three hours.”

Saturday’s order also followed an announcement Friday from the federal Transportation Safety Board that it was deploying a team of investigators “following a fire potentially involving a freight train in Lytton, British Columbia.”

CN and CP last Thursday in separate statements pledged $1.5 million and $1 million respectively to wildfire relief efforts in the Lytton area.

The Ag Transport Coalition, which monitors Prairie grain movement by rail on behalf of member grain organizations and industry players, on Wednesday last week reported a “slowdown in operations as a result of the wildfires in the vicinity of Lytton.”

The coalition had reported “the closure of main lines for both CN and CP south of Kamloops effectively cutting off all access to and from the Port of Vancouver” at the time.

“We continue to expect an extended recovery time given the magnitude of the outage and the recognition that this disruption has impacted all commodity traffic, not just grain,” the coalition said. — Glacier FarmMedia Network

The post CN, CP trains ordered to slow down against fire risk appeared first on Manitoba Co-operator.

The shutdown fueled concerns about shipping U.S. grain and soy to export markets at a time when global inventories are slim and prices are near eight-year highs. U.S. corn futures sank more than five per cent in a setback from the lofty prices.

At the spot where the river is closed, 26 vessels with 430 barges are waiting to pass north and 21 vessels with 341 barges are in the queue to go south, said Petty Officer Carlos Galarza, a Coast Guard spokesman.

A day earlier, a total of 411 barges carrying crude oil, dry cargo such as crops, and other materials were backed up in both directions.

The Tennessee Department of Transportation must finish investigating the bridge before a decision is made to reopen the river, Galarza said.

Tennessee officials hope to “have a decision for river traffic” in the next day or so, said Nichole Lawrence, a spokeswoman for the state Department of Transportation. She said a timeline has not been determined and the bridge is still under inspection.

The Coast Guard stopped all traffic on the river near Memphis on Tuesday between mile markers 736 and 737 after a fracture was discovered in the Hernando de Soto Bridge that spans the river.

Almost all grain barges must pass beneath the bridge on their way to Gulf of Mexico export facilities near New Orleans after being loaded along the upper Mississippi, Ohio, Illinois or Missouri rivers, according to the Soy Transportation Coalition, an agricultural industry group.

Grain traders said they expect river traffic to resume within days. However, shippers are not booking barges for this week and next week because the closure has left them uncertain barges will be available, barge sources said.

— Reporting for Reuters by Tom Polansek in Chicago; additional reporting by Julie Ingwersen.

The post U.S. barge backup worsens as Mississippi River shut near Memphis appeared first on Manitoba Co-operator.

That’s the fundamental question at the heart of an ongoing review of the Canadian Grain Commission and Canada Grain Act.

As our Allan Dawson reports, many in the grain trade want to see the regulatory burden lighten.

The Western Grain Elevator Association, which represents the interests of the largest grain-handling and merchandising firms, says there’s a lot of duplication and unnecessary expense built into the system.

In some ways they have a point. As it stands the commission currently has a ‘coming-and-going’ inspection role that exceeds anything we’re aware of in any other sector.

They are the final arbiter of grades and dockage between the grain companies and grain producers. That’s a worthy role, and one where the commission can help ensure the little guys and gals get a fair shake when they are dealing with big companies.

Their second point of intervention, however, is a bit muddier. The commission is also charged with what’s known as outbound inspection, where it certifies the volume and quality of grain being shipped out of Canada.

At one point this service was seen as a key part of the ‘brand Canada’ approach to marketing Canadian grain globally. But these days it’s unclear whether such a brand even truly exists anymore, and whether all parties in the grain sector agree to its value.

At least that’s one of the points that former CWB executive Ward Weisensel makes in a report he authored on behalf of the Saskatchewan Wheat Development Commission last fall. In particular, he honed in on the competing interests of farmers and grain companies on this particular point.

“Farmers commonly focus in on the importance of the quality of our products and that this allows Canadian grain to earn premiums relative to our competitors in world markets,” Weisensel wrote.

But that understanding shifts when grain companies consider the value of that brand, as it’s a brand every exporter of Canadian grain can tap into, making it useless as a point of differentiation from their perspective.

“Every company takes the brand identity of the grain or oilseed they are trading as a given, and while it may give Canada an edge in particular markets, this product brand is not something that can be used to create additional value for any individual company,” he notes.

And that, in a nutshell is the dynamic that farmers, and their producer organizations, are going to have to manage throughout this review process. While they and the grain trade may have many common interests, they are not perfectly aligned.

On the issue of outward inspection, grain companies clearly want to do away with the CGC’s role, and move to a system of third-party private inspectors. They say the costs will be lower, and that in the international marketplace, the domestic grades issued by the commission are meaningless anyway, as most contracts are specification-based rather than grade-based.

That is to say that quality parameters such as oil content or protein levels, moisture levels, dockage and so forth are contained in the contract itself, and the question of the grading system doesn’t really enter into it. This is a world where functionality is king, and the grain companies want the maximum flexibility to meet those specifications and the least hassle and expense possible.

And to that end they’ve engaged in de-marketing Canada’s grain quality assurance system, the report contends, and instead actively upsold the private inspection option, which has grown rapidly in recent years.

“This is not an indication that buyers have lost confidence or do not want to use the CGC as the determination of quality on the grain they buy from Canada. Rather, it is a reflection of the fact that grain companies have been pushing customers for the addition of this option for many years,” Weisensel wrote.

In another very interesting section of the Sask Wheat report, Mercantile Consulting Ventures delves into the “Data Requirements for a Transparent Market” and finds a number of opportunities to make the at-times opaque Canadian grain market far clearer for producers.

While there’s a lot of detail in their section of the report, worth noting is the system they’re recommending appears to more closely resemble some of the U.S. data-reporting requirements that would help ensure fewer nasty market surprises.

The consultations have wrapped up as of April 30, but there’s still plenty of wrangling left before any final decisions are made.

It’s going to be in the best interests of farmers to keep a very close eye on this file and ensure that any future changes to the system serve them well.

The post Editor’s Take: Coming and going appeared first on Manitoba Co-operator.

That’s one of 17 recommendations Keystone Agricultural Producers (KAP) makes in its submission to Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada (AAFC), which is seeking views on changes to the Canada Grain Act and the CGC, which administers it.

Why it matters: For 109 years the Canadian Grain Commission, under authority of the Canada Grain Act, has regulated Western Canada’s multibillion dollar grain industry. Views vary on how to improve the act to best serve farmers and grain companies.

KAP also recommends the CGC continue to provide outward inspection and that the federal government maintain exemptions to allow flexibility, in particular for bulk commodities, to support various commodities moving to markets.

“To maintain Canada’s international reputation for high-quality grain, the CGC must ensure all grain leaving Canada meets buyer specifications,” KAP’s submission says. “KAP supports the role of the CGC as the entity responsible for regulating Canadian grain handling. Producers are concerned that changes to the CGC’s role in outward inspection would limit the quality assurance and verification standards international buyers expect from Canadian products.”

The Saskatchewan Wheat Development Committee (Sask Wheat), Agricultural Producers Association of Saskatchewan (APAS) and National Farmers Union (NFU) have similar positions.

However, the Western Grain Elevators Association (WGEA) wants mandatory CGC outward inspection to end in favour of using inspectors from private companies certified by the CGC to ensure the quality of Canadian grain exports isn’t compromised.

In its submission the WGEA says 70 per cent of the grain its members export via ship is currently inspected by private inspectors, in addition to the CGC. The association, which represents Canada’s biggest grain companies, says inspecting grain twice is an unnecessary cost.

The Alberta Wheat and Barley Commission and Western Canadian Wheat Growers Association agree.

But KAP, Sask Wheat, APAS and the NFU see value in maintaining CGC outward inspection.

“In the 2019-2020 crop year, the CGC issued 20,150 documents, of which 2,465 were certificate finals, 8,146 letters of analysis and 9,499 statements of assurance,” KAP’s submission says. “The volume of requests for CGC certification demonstrates the significant value the CGC provides in assuring international buyers that Canadian grain is of the highest quality.”

KAP notes exemptions within Canada Grain Act regulations allows Canadian grain to be exported by truck without CGC outward inspection, and same for grain exported in containers.

“Recognizing the diversity of crops exported from Manitoba, exemptions or accommodations for unique sector requirements should be provided within any future amendments to legislation and policy,” KAP’s submission says.

KAP. like Sask Wheat, APAS and the NFU, wants the federal government to work with industry and the CGC to report weekly on import and export sales for all agricultural commodities.

KAP also recommends allowing producers to initiate the Subject to Inspectors’ Grade and Dockage process at any time from delivery to cheque settlement. Now it can only be done by the grain owner at the time of delivery. With more grain hauled by commercial truckers, farmers have less access to the option.

KAP recommends the CGC and federal government scrutinize potential producer payment security options, including an insurance-based model and a producer compensation fund.

Under the current program grain companies must post security to cover farmer liabilities.

That costs grain companies, as well as the CGC which administers the program. And sometimes the program fails to fully compensate farmers after buyers go broke before paying for grain.

KAP recommends that the CGC consider options to include feed mills in the Safeguards for Grain Farmers Program.

KAP also recommends the CGC investigate way to speed up falling number tests and to make results more accurate, and rectify the differences between UGMA and 919 moisture testers.

The CGC was created under the grain act in 1912 to work “in the interests of the grain producers, establish and maintain standards of quality for Canadian grain and regulate grain handling in Canada, to ensure a dependable commodity for domestic and export markets.”

The Harper government intended to revise the Grain Act but its legislation was derailed by the election in 2015.

In 2019 the current federal government started over, but the process was waylaid by the COVID-19 pandemic in early 2020.

In January this year AAFC began consulting the grain sector about possible revisions to the Act.

KAP’s 17 recommendations on the Canadian Grain Commission are:

• KAP recommends that the CGC continue to operate in the best interests of producers and the Canadian grain industry and as an independent third party to establish grain grades and standards.
• KAP recommends that the Canada Grain Act be amended to require primary elevators to keep one-kg samples of all grain deliveries until the time of cheque settlement, and to allow producers to initiate the Subject to Inspectors’ Grade and Dockage process at any time from delivery to cheque settlement.
• KAP recommends that the CGC increase sampling oversight and consider random elevator inspections to ensure sampling procedures are adhered to.
• KAP recommends that the CGC consider options to include feed mills in the Safeguards for Grain Farmers Program.
• KAP recommends that the CGC and the Government of Canada initiate a thorough analysis of potential producer payment security options, including an insurance-based model and a producer compensation fund.
• KAP recommends that the CGC review the variability of grain contracts and consider options for standardized delivery contracts to protect the interests of producers.
• KAP recommends that the CGC continue to provide vital information online to producers about licensed grain buyers and consider providing clarity for producers regarding grain sales to new facilities like value-added processors.
• KAP recommends that the CGC identify facilities that may be considered a license subclass and work with industry and affected subclass facilities to determine fair licensing requirements that would accommodate operational needs and provide payment protection for producers.
• KAP recommends that the CGC continue to provide outward inspection and that the Government of Canada maintain exemptions within the Canada Grain Act and Canada Grain Regulations to enable flexibility, in particular for bulk commodities, to support various commodities moving to markets.
• KAP recommends that the CGC investigate methods to standardize and increase testing precision and speed in the determination of a falling number.
• KAP recommends that the CGC investigate options to rectify the differences between UGMA and 919 moisture testers to ensure consistent test results.
• KAP recommends that the CGC mandate, at a minimum, yearly maintenance and calibration of grain company moisture testers by certified technicians.
• KAP recommends that the CGC implement a system of standardization and calibration for protein testers.
• KAP recommends that the CGC work with elevator operators and grain buyers to ensure all platform scales have clear displays to adhere to the transparency required by the Canada Grain Act.
• KAP recommends that the Government of Canada work with industry and the CGC to report weekly on import and export sales for all agricultural commodities.
• KAP recommends that the current system of variety registration remain as a stable, third party, peer reviewed, merit based, resource for CGC grain classification.
• KAP recommends that the CGC inform and educate producers about their rights within the Canada Grain Act and services offered by the CGC.

The post KAP recommends keeping grain commission’s mandate appeared first on Manitoba Co-operator.