A review of the Canadian Grain Commission and Canada Grain Act should be in the hands of the federal agriculture minister by the end of this month.
The independent consultants writing the report were to meet with federal officials in Winnipeg and Ottawa this week to finalize the recommendations. The report will then be submitted to agriculture minister Chuck Strahl, who will decide when it will be made public.
A consultant involved in writing the report declined to comment on the recommendations before they are given to the minister.
Read Also
Agriculture ministers agree to AgriStability changes
federal government proposed several months ago to increase the compensation rate from 80 to 90 per cent and double the maximum payment from $3 million to $6 million
However, Tom Halpenny of Triticum Consulting did say the report will reflect feedback from industry and producer groups, who generally supported the idea that Canada requires a continued strong grain quality assurance system.
“However, when it comes to the best way to deliver that, there are some differing opinions,” he said.
Halpenny also said there was “fairly strong support” for retaining existing producer protection provisions in the act.
The act states that the commission’s objective is to set quality standards and regulate grain handling “in the interests of the grain producers.”
Producers were almost unanimous in asking that the clause be retained, but others in the grain industry felt the act should treat all stakeholders equally and not give priority to farmers.
“I guess what we have to do is provide clarity in areas where clarity doesn’t obviously exist now,” said Halpenny.
The review, conducted by Compas, a Toronto-based public opinion firm, was initiated last year by Parliament in light of increasing complaints about the act and the commission.
Grain companies say the act includes outdated rules and regulations that stifle innovation and efficiency and cost everyone in the system money.
At the same time, a number of farmers and farm groups say the commission has been paying too much attention to the concerns of the grain trade at the expense of farmers.
The consultants met with producers at eight public meetings this summer, although Halpenny acknowledged that the timing limited direct farmer input. They also got feedback from some 400 groups and individuals through an on-line survey and written submissions.
“I don’t think anyone was left out of this process,” he said.
The review takes place against a backdrop of a grain commission starving for money in light of shortfalls in government funding and reduced revenue from service fees.
The report is expected to make recommendations on two issues that are the subject of ongoing internal reviews at the commission.
Those are the future of mandatory inward inspection and weighing, and the future of the kernel visual distinguishability system.
