Grainswest - Winter 2022

Winter 2022 Grains West 14 THE FARMGATE GRAIN COMPANIES AND CERTAIN industry groups would like to see Cana- dian Grain Commission’s (CGC) outward inspection practice halted. They insist it is a duplicate service, as these compa- nies typically hire independent firms to complete grain inspections. Is it a matter of “double trouble” or “twice is nice?” It depends whom you ask. “Today, about 70 per cent of grain exported overseas from Canada uses third-party certification as the basis of quality assurance,” said Wade Sobkowich, executive director of the Western Grain Elevator Association. “Over the last five decades, there has been a transition to the use of third-party inspections, mostly because of timelines, cost and flexibility.” WHEN THIRD PARTIES ARE FIRST CHOICE In part, third-party inspections appeal to buyers because they offer continuity when the same company tests at both loading and unloading, but the draw goes far beyond this. “International buyers are more accustomed to, and accepting of, private inspections versus govern- ment certification,” said Fraser Gilbert, business development manager at SGS Life Science Services in Winnipeg, MB, an international testing, inspection and certification company. “The reality is many buyers simply don’t trust a situation where a country is selling them grain and that country’s government is vouching for the grain’s quality,” said Gilbert. “Private companies can also test to international standards established by particular nations and test for specific aspects such as falling number or oil content.” As well, if a buyer needs testing at 6 p.m. on Friday and it cannot wait until Monday morning, third-party testers are better able to accommodate such requests than government agencies. KNOW YOUR LIMITS “When private inspection companies first came on the scene in Canada, they were immediately embraced by foreign buyers, and for good reason,” said Gilbert. “The CGC is just not equipped to handle many of the testing requirements that other countries put forth. As soon as other countries realized companies such as ours could fill that void, they began reaching out to us on a regular basis. It’s a situation that begs an obvious question: If buyers don’t want government testing of the grain they purchase from us: Why is the CGC still insisting on doing it?” According to many in the industry, a more logical approach would be to have CGC accredit and oversee third-party in- spection companies, rather than perform- ing the inspections directly. “The CGC has an inherent conflict of interest when it serves as both the regulator and service provider,” said Sob- kowich. “We do not want to detract from their ability to set grades, as that is a vital element for both buyers and sellers, and that should be their core function. From there, they should accredit third parties to grade to those standards. This would reduce costs for industry and farmers by introducing an element of competition in both service and price while also pro- viding more consistency throughout the supply chain.” Eliminating duplicate inspections and transitioning the role of the CGC is top of mind for farm groups such as the Alberta Wheat Commission (AWC) and Alberta Barley. “Getting CGC out of the testing business has been discussed at length by our wheat and barley boards,” said Geoff Backman, AWC manager of business development and markets. “In years where there is more grain exported than was ex- pected, it produces a surplus of inspection fees. That money represents grower dollars that could have been applied to farming enterprises. We have continually seen Duplicationequalsdiscontent Grain sector testy about double inspections “One challenge is that CGC costs in general are recovered largely through our inspection services.” —Remi Gosselin