EDMONTON – A move to shift power within the organization that recommends which cultivars should be chosen for registration has been defeated.
The shift would have granted more authority to smaller sub-groups that review registration requests for new cultivars and pass along their recommendations to the overarching Prairie Registration Recommending Committee for Grain.
The PRRCG then passes its recommendations on to the Canadian Food Inspection Agency.
The vote on the motion to allow subcommittees more authority came out 60 percent in favour, but 66 percent agreement is needed to pass a major decision.
Read Also
Canola oil transloading facility opens
DP World just opened its new canola oil transload facility at the Port of Vancouver. It can ship one million tonnes of the commodity per year.
“It was decided to let the membership determine the next move,” said plant breeder Mario Therrien, who put forward the motion.
“The outcome of the memberships’ wishes, whatever that may be, will be decided at the PRRCG annual meeting in Saskatoon in 2004,” said Therrien.
The motion was designed to give the subcommittees power over cultivar recommendations and would leave the executive to deal with administration, legislation and regulations.
A similar motion was made at last year’s meeting in Winnipeg. There, the wheat, rye and triticale committee voted to split off from the main body because of problems it had with the excecutive’s veto powers and problems with the CFIA rules.
Within the PRRCG are subcommittees for wheat, rye and triticale; barley and oats; oilseeds; and pulse and special crops. Teams within the subcommittees evaluate the agronomy, quality and disease resistance of cultivars being put forward by plant breeders.
Generally, recommendations to accept or reject new cultivars by the subcommittees are approved by the executive committee of the PRRCG. But two years ago, recommendations by the wheat, rye and triticale subcommittee to reject two cultivars of wheat were overturned by the executive committee.
That decision was later overturned again by the CFIA.
“The way it was managed was very poor,” said Stephen Fox, chair of the wheat, rye and triticale committee, who believes the subcommittees, made up of scientists, know best.
“We want to gain a little more control of the job we’re supposed to be doing,” he said.
Others scientists said giving the subcommittees more autonomy would neuter the executive body. They said with the subcommittee sending its recommendations directly to the CFIA, the executive would deal only with housekeeping issues.
