Test CGC review Test

Commodity Marketing

Tools

CGC review

Test
Feb 23, 2021 | 16:16 31 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.
Last edited by westernvicki; Feb 23, 2021 at 16:29.
Reply With Quote

  • Feb 23, 2021 | 16:50 32 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 Then when SEC 9 was repealed by Ritz in 2010 it got worse. Reply With Quote
    Feb 23, 2021 | 16:50 33
    Quote Originally Posted by westernvicki View Post
    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 . Reply With Quote
    Feb 23, 2021 | 16:53 34
    Quote Originally Posted by bucket View Post
    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? Reply With Quote
    Feb 23, 2021 | 16:58 35
    Quote Originally Posted by CptnObvious View Post
    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???? Reply With Quote
  • 1 Like

    LEP

  • Feb 23, 2021 | 17:08 36
    Quote Originally Posted by westernvicki View Post
    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. Reply With Quote

  • Feb 25, 2021 | 08:27 37 https://www.manitobacooperator.ca/ne...hen-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?”
    Last edited by chuckChuck; Feb 25, 2021 at 08:38.
    Reply With Quote
  • 1 Like


  • Feb 25, 2021 | 08:36 38 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/ne...eview-revived/ Reply With Quote
  • 1 Like


  • ajl
    Feb 25, 2021 | 09:15 39 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. Reply With Quote
    Feb 25, 2021 | 09:26 40 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. Reply With Quote
    Feb 25, 2021 | 09:29 41
    Quote Originally Posted by CptnObvious View Post
    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... Reply With Quote
    Feb 25, 2021 | 09:32 42
    Quote Originally Posted by bucket View Post
    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. Reply With Quote
    Feb 25, 2021 | 09:34 43
    Quote Originally Posted by CptnObvious View Post
    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. Reply With Quote
    Feb 25, 2021 | 09:34 44 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! Reply With Quote
    Feb 25, 2021 | 09:36 45
    Quote Originally Posted by Rareearth View Post
    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. Reply With Quote
    blackpowder's Avatar Feb 25, 2021 | 10:19 46
    Quote Originally Posted by CptnObvious View Post
    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.
    Why should I or anyone else subsidize your rail frieght because of where you live. If wheat is uneconomical for you to grow so be it.
    I said this before 2012 and I still do.
    And yes Virginia, you were being subsidized! Reply With Quote
    Feb 25, 2021 | 10:30 47
    Quote Originally Posted by blackpowder View Post
    Why should I or anyone else subsidize your rail frieght because of where you live. If wheat is uneconomical for you to grow so be it.
    I said this before 2012 and I still do.
    And yes Virginia, you were being subsidized!
    True ...but in the bigger scheme of things Russia has enacted the equivalent of the crow rate...

    Right or wrong ...just the fact that they have understood the value of agriculture to the economy. Reply With Quote
    Feb 25, 2021 | 10:55 48 Say all you want about farm groups, at least their out there on issues such as this. Individual farmers just don't have the means and the time to get involved in every issue, even though we should.

    We all can't have a Wade Sobowich of the WGEA who's sole purpose is to ensure grain handling companies are involved in the dismantling of any organization that benefits the Western Canadian producer over the Grain companies.


    The CGC was on the radar of Ritz Crackers because we all know who he answered to. Couldn't succeed as a farmer so why not tear down any organization or program that could possibly help farmers that can make a go of it.

    Jealous Bas Tard nothing else! Reply With Quote
    Feb 25, 2021 | 11:09 49
    Quote Originally Posted by foragefarmer View Post
    Say all you want about farm groups, at least their out there on issues such as this. Individual farmers just don't have the means and the time to get involved in every issue, even though we should.

    We all can't have a Wade Sobowich of the WGEA who's sole purpose is to ensure grain handling companies are involved in the dismantling of any organization that benefits the Western Canadian producer over the Grain companies.


    The CGC was on the radar of Ritz Crackers because we all know who he answered to. Couldn't succeed as a farmer so why not tear down any organization or program that could possibly help farmers that can make a go of it.

    Jealous Bas Tard nothing else!
    So you agree with Saskwheat hiring a former grain company official to write about the CGC? On behalf of who...seems like Saskwheat is acting in the graincos interest. Reply With Quote
    Feb 25, 2021 | 11:48 50
    Quote Originally Posted by bucket View Post
    So you agree with Saskwheat hiring a former grain company official to write about the CGC? On behalf of who...seems like Saskwheat is acting in the graincos interest.
    Don't farm in Sask, never read what W.W. wrote, but if your stating the report benefits the Grain companies, I'll take your word on it. Is there a specific page you can point out that does show benefit to Grain Co. that W.W wrote on behalf of Saskwheat. Not challenging you but I should read it to get educated.

    I do like KAP's June 2020 submission on behalf of Manitoba's producers and that's where I farm and was making reference to.

    I'm glad what they wrote on my behalf. If they hadn't of done it I know I would have never gotten around to it. So you do see where I'm coming from?

    Thanks Reply With Quote
    blackpowder's Avatar Feb 25, 2021 | 12:33 51
    Quote Originally Posted by bucket View Post
    True ...but in the bigger scheme of things Russia has enacted the equivalent of the crow rate...

    Right or wrong ...just the fact that they have understood the value of agriculture to the economy.
    I understand i think.
    I don't have any answers.
    A made in Canada formula.
    Maybe ourselves and Russia are heading the same direction just differently.
    Food in NA too cheap.
    Winners and losers whether you subsidize or not.
    We are large acre producers of a world wide raw commodity with fluctuating ever narrowing margins. No one cares and if it has to go back to grass because of economics so be it.
    I empathize with your very valid question, and would direct you to the keystone issue for your answer. But in 100+ years what do you see? What can you do today to affect that?
    I will however, never fail to call Cpt Obvious and Chuck out on their lies.
    I will pay for their shipping Equality when they pay me to grow soybeans. Get my point? I cant grow them.
    Tonnes moved to date this year should quiet any but the lunatic. I will sell out before I go back in time or allow any Lost Cause lies to grow. Talk about the true meaning of a denier. Reply With Quote
  • 1 Like


  • blackpowder's Avatar Feb 25, 2021 | 12:40 52
    Quote Originally Posted by CptnObvious View Post
    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.
    Then answer this. Why do for profit companies, who own the grain, pay for private inspectors? Reply With Quote
  • 1 Like


  • Feb 25, 2021 | 15:57 53
    Quote Originally Posted by CptnObvious View Post
    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.
    I don't remember to much actual shipping of wheat.

    We pretended to pay them and they pretended to haul it. Reply With Quote
    Feb 26, 2021 | 09:52 54
    Quote Originally Posted by blackpowder View Post
    Then answer this. Why do for profit companies, who own the grain, pay for private inspectors?
    A) to inspect for criteria currently not examined by the CGC, like falling number, and B) to get everyone used to private inspectors. The terminals have increased their own risk ever since they got the CGC out of inward inspection. In the rare instances when the CGC grade was different coming in and going out it was up to the CGC to explain and make it right. Now, with their own employees grading and binning grain coming in there is a much higher risk of loading a ship and finding out the official CGC grade is not what they guessed it would be. It is now totally up to the terminal to take the hit for missing contract specs. If the terminals can convince enough people that CGC outward inspection is redundant then they can get their own guys grading both in and out which reduces their risk. And increases ours. Private graders are more likely to support those that pay their salary so grades will be less objective and prices will drop. Even just the idea that this will be possible will make the prices drop. Reply With Quote
    Feb 26, 2021 | 09:56 55
    Quote Originally Posted by bucket View Post
    So you agree with Saskwheat hiring a former grain company official to write about the CGC? On behalf of who...seems like Saskwheat is acting in the graincos interest.
    Could you explain how SaskWheat and the WW CGC report, separately or together, are working in the interests of the grain cos... Reply With Quote
    Feb 26, 2021 | 09:58 56
    Quote Originally Posted by blackpowder View Post
    Why should I or anyone else subsidize your rail frieght because of where you live. If wheat is uneconomical for you to grow so be it.
    I said this before 2012 and I still do.
    And yes Virginia, you were being subsidized!
    Subsidized how? By whom? Reply With Quote
    Feb 26, 2021 | 10:02 57
    Quote Originally Posted by CptnObvious View Post
    Could you explain how SaskWheat and the WW CGC report, separately or together, are working in the interests of the grain cos...
    Yes...they hired a grainco executive to write the report.

    And a guy that had the ear of government and the CGC and did nothing on behalf of farmers.

    W.W. was a catalyst for farmers to get rid of the CWB...he never represented farmers views.

    Where is the ask for penalties on contracts for delaying delivery? Why not correct the one sided contracts.

    What about better CGC reporting?

    Sounds like Ward wants to be the chief commissioner and continue his lapdog ways.
    Last edited by bucket; Feb 26, 2021 at 10:06.
    Reply With Quote
    Feb 26, 2021 | 10:49 58
    Quote Originally Posted by bucket View Post
    Yes...they hired a grainco executive to write the report.

    And a guy that had the ear of government and the CGC and did nothing on behalf of farmers.

    W.W. was a catalyst for farmers to get rid of the CWB...he never represented farmers views.

    Where is the ask for penalties on contracts for delaying delivery? Why not correct the one sided contracts.

    What about better CGC reporting?

    Sounds like Ward wants to be the chief commissioner and continue his lapdog ways.
    WW worked for the CWB, not the graincos, until there was no CWB. He did not have the ear of government( or the CGC, really) and was not a catalyst. The CWB was ordered by the Harper government to shut up about farmers interests and do nothing but their specific jobs. Delayed delivery? It's more than twice as bad now. Reply With Quote
    Feb 26, 2021 | 11:05 59
    Quote Originally Posted by CptnObvious View Post
    WW worked for the CWB, not the graincos, until there was no CWB. He did not have the ear of government( or the CGC, really) and was not a catalyst. The CWB was ordered by the Harper government to shut up about farmers interests and do nothing but their specific jobs. Delayed delivery? It's more than twice as bad now.
    He worked for G3. And read his bio in the report. Reply With Quote
    Feb 26, 2021 | 11:08 60
    Quote Originally Posted by bucket View Post
    He worked for G3. And read his bio in the report.
    I said, "until there was no CWB." Reply With Quote