SA Groundnut Forum (SAGF)
held on 18 April 2013 at 10:00 at the offices of the Oilseeds Industry, Woodmead

1. Opening

   The meeting was opened with a prayer, offered by Mr Gerhard Keun.

2. Welcome

   The Chairperson, Mr GTduT Keun, welcomed all present to the first meeting of the Groundnut Forum in 2013, and extended a special word of welcome to Mr Jan du Preez.

3. Attendance

   Present
   Mr GTduT Keun	Chairperson
   Ms A van Deventer	Vice Chairperson
   Ms R Beukes	DAFF
   Ms P Campbell	DOH: Food Control
   Mr J Cohn	OLAM
   Mr GL de Kock	Roba
   Mr JCG du Preez	Consultant
   Mr N Hawkins	SAGIS
   Mr S Heilbron	PPECB
   Mr RW Higgs	Triotrade
   Mr WJ la Cock	SA Groundnut Marketing
   Mr W Lourens	Simba
   Mr C Louw	GrainSA
   Ms C Mapatlare	DAFF
   Mr C Mathews	Mpumalanga Dept Agriculture
   Mr M Mosome	DAFF
   Dr D Naicker	PPECB
   Mr R Nerwich	The Snack Factory
   Mr GL Nortjé	GWK
   Mr W Roux	SAfrinut
   Ms L Salomon	ARC-GCI
   Dr G Thompson	ARC-GCI
   Mr PP van Wyk	VGM
   Mr PA Visser	P Farm
   Ms C Walters	Blancom
   Mr N Wegner	PPECB
   Ms E Harmse	OPDT Contractor
   Apologies
   Dr L Chetty	SANSOR
   Mr A Cronjé	Tiger Consumer Brands
   Mr O de Witt	Praxia trading
   Dr A Lubbe	Grain Silo Industry
   Ms S Matai	PPECB
   Dr F Meyer	BFAP
   Ms AE Pretorius	ARC-GCI
   Ms J Sadie	DAFF
   Ms M Scheepers	DAFF
   Mr GJH Scholtemeijer	OAC
   Dr CJ Swanevelder	Consultant
   Mr C Thabethe	DOH
   Dr WJ van der Walt	SANCU
   Dr M Visser	GrainSA
   Mr C Wolhuter	Skemaprodukte

4. Personalia

   None reported.

5. Finalisation of agenda

   The agenda was accepted as it stood, with the addition of:

   • Item 10.5 – Abolishment of import duty on raw nuts, and
   • Item 10.6 – Presentation: PPECB Laboratory improvements and services.

6. Approval of minutes

   1. Approval of the minutes of the meeting of the SA Groundnut Forum held on 31 October 2012

      Resolved:

      1. That the minutes of the meeting of the SA Groundnut Forum, that was held on 31 October 2012, be accepted as a true and fair reflection of that meeting, after one amendment had been effected.

7. Matters arising

   1. Seed quality

      (Resolution 7.2.1 of the SA Groundnut Forum minutes of 31 October 2012)

      The Chairperson raised the matter of the quality of the groundnut seed that was made available to the producers. He called on Mr Louw to comment on the matter.

      Mr Louw said the quality issue, and specifically the physical qualities of groundnut seed, had been discussed at the previous meeting of the Forum. He noted that the Plant Improvement Act currently only prescribed that seed should contain not more than 2,0% other material, not more than 0,2% seed of deviating plants and have a moisture content of not more that 7,0%. He said to the best of his knowledge, the physical requirements that related to biologically damaged seed, insect-eaten and damaged, and discoloured seed had been deleted in 1990.

      Mr Visser suggested that the physical requirements as detailed in the Government Gazette of 25 November 1983, Annexure 4, be scrutinised, so that the desired physical qualities, that would serve to the advantage of the industry, could once again be included in the regulations on commercial groundnut seed quality.

      The Chairperson requested the members to mail their comments and suggestions to his office, so that copies of those, as well as copies of the relevant Government Gazette, could be included with the documentation of the next meeting, for further discussion.

      Resolved:

      1. That the members of the Groundnut Forum be requested to mail their comments and suggestions on the physical requirements of groundnut seed, as detailed in the Government Gazette of 25 November 1983, Annexure 4, to the Chairperson of the Groundnut Forum, and that it be noted that copies of those, as well as copies of the relevant Government Gazette, would be included with the documentation of the next meeting, for further discussion.

         Chairperson
         Members
         SAGF

   2. HACCP regulations

      (Resolution 7.3.1 of the SA Groundnut Forum minutes of 31 October 2012)

      The Chairperson said he had yet to officially approach the Department of Health (DOH) on the matter of creating awareness amongst the relevant role players on the necessity of groundnut processing plants obtaining HACCP compliance.

      Ms Campbell informed the Forum that the regulations relating to HACCP resided in her portfolio. She said as far as she could gather from the minutes, the Forum did not seem to have clarity on the matter with regard to HACCP regulations and requirements.

      Ms Campbell noted that non-mandatory HACCP regulations had been established in 2003. She said the process was to be implemented incrementally in the various sectors, as per the schedule in the regulations. She added that a specific industry could, however, request that a mandatory HACCP system be implemented in that industry, provided that 60% of that industry agreed to the implementation of such. She said in the event of a food safety issue that was of critical significance and required intervention, the Director General may decree that that industry had to implement a HACCP system.

      Ms Campbell said she had been informed that the Groundnut Forum had applied to the DOH to be listed as one of the sectors that wished to have HACCP implemented in their industry. She noted that the industry had been requested to draw up a HACCP plan, to be certified against. She said the regulations had been amended in 2009, so as to also include peanut butter manufacturers and groundnut sorters and graders, who were then allowed one year's grace period to implement the HACCP system, and have HACCP certification in place by November 2010.

      Ms Campbell said during the European Union's (EU) export certification visit, it was found that the groundnut industry's level of compliance to the HACCP regulations was seriously lacking. She expressed her concern that the industry had indicated that they were not aware that they had to adhere to the regulations, although the request for the implementation of a mandatory HACCP system came from the industry itself.

      During the members' discussion on the information Ms Campbell had provided, the following matters were raised:

      • the matter with regard to imported producers' stock not being subject to HACCP certification, because of the fact that local producers were subject to producers' guidelines only, and not to regulations. It was noted that grading was done at the selection facility, and that those facilities should implement HACCP systems;
      • a proper definition of the term "producers' stock" was needed;
      • food safety should not be a grading issue;
      • grading regulations only applied to processed groundnuts, and the possible implied grey area of stock for further processing having only been shelled and not graded, and not tested for aflatoxin – it would be necessary to establish the facts in this regard;
      • loopholes with regard to imports of farmers' stocks at border posts needed to be identified and communicated to the DOH;
      • the necessity of taking a serious look at the available standards and codes;
      • gaps in terms of rejected exports being returned to South Africa without proper controls over the further use of those exports locally: communication between Customs and SARS with regard to re-imports needed to be assessed.

      The Forum agreed that their original view that all groundnut factories should be HACCP compliant would stand. The matter of firm action against non-compliance was discussed at some length, as the conviction was voiced that only processing companies aimed at exports had been targeted for HACCP compliance, with smaller companies being allowed to do as they wished and getting away with it.

      Ms Campbell gave the assurance that the necessary administrative procedures would be in place before the end of 2013, so as to establish information networks in order to ensure that the necessary systems had been implemented and compliance could be monitored. She said control would be reactive, with environmental health practitioners (EHP) checking at local levels, and taking those measures that were deemed to be fit.

      The Chairperson concluded the discussion by saying that the various issues raised would be listed, with the view to discussing such in detail at the next meeting. He added that the necessary supporting documents would be included with the agenda of that meeting.

      Resolved:

      1. That the following issues would be discussed at the next meeting of the Forum:
         • the matter with regard to imported producers' stock not being subject to HACCP certification, because of the fact that local producers were subject to producers' guidelines only, and not to regulations. It was noted that grading was done at the selection facility, and that those facilities should implement HACCP systems;
         • a proper definition of the term "producers' stock" was needed;
         • food safety should not be a grading issue;
         • grading regulations only applied to processed groundnuts, and the possible implied grey area of stock for further processing having only been shelled and not graded, and not tested for aflatoxin - it would be necessary to establish the facts in this regard;
         • loopholes with regard to imports of farmers' stocks at border posts needed to be identified and communicated to the DOH;
         • the necessity of taking a serious look at the available standards and codes;
         • gaps in terms of rejected exports being returned to South Africa without proper controls over the further use of those exports locally: communication between Customs and SARS with regard to re-imports needed to be assessed.

         Chairperson
         SAGF

   3. Structure of representation on the Groundnut Forum, Oilseeds Advisory Committee (OAC) and Oil- and Protein Seeds Development Trust (OPDT)

      (Resolution 7.5.1 of the SA Groundnut Forum minutes of 31 October 2012)

      Cognisance was taken of the names of the members of the OAC and the OPDT, as reflected in the document appended as Annexure B.

   4. South African Food Safety Control Workshop

      (Resolution 10.2.1 of the SA Groundnut Forum minutes of 31 October 2012)

      Cognisance was taken of the summary of the action plan as decided on during the SA Food Safety Control Workshop, held on 13 November 2012, the discussion document "Proposal for a risk-based approach to managing compliance with food safety requirements for products of plant origin presented for export" as well as the problem statements for discussion at the next combined Food Safety Forum meeting.

      Mr Mosome remarked that DAFF intended to prepare a document, in which the South African control system to manage compliance with food safety requirements were detailed in a nutshell, with the view to disseminating that document to those countries that South African exports of products of plant origin were intended for.

      He said the plan was to present a mini workshop, following on the next Food Safety Forum meeting, with the view to discussing the outcomes of the tasks that had been assigned to some of the participants at the 13 November 2012 meeting.

      Ms van Deventer confirmed that she would provide feedback on her attendance of the May 2013 Food Safety Forum meeting, at the following Groundnut Forum meeting.

      Resolved:

      1. That feedback is being awaited on the May 2013 Food Safety Forum meeting.

         Vice Chairperson
         SAGF

   5. Laboratories: Germination tests

      (Resolution 10.5.1 of the SA Groundnut Forum minutes of 31 October 2012)

      The Chairperson said the issue of the lack of sufficient laboratories, that had the necessary capacity and skills to do germination tests on groundnut seed, had been raised at the previous meeting.

      The Chairperson said although most of the seed companies did have their own registered laboratories and employed qualified seed analysts, these services were not readily available to others, as their own issues were prioritised. Mr Nerwich pointed out that Advance Seed's laboratories did offer such services to others.

      Mr Visser suggested that Advance Seed be advised timeously that their laboratory would be approached to do groundnut germination tests, so that they could be prepared for the following season's tests. The Chairperson confirmed that he would engage Advance Seed and various other role players in discussions in this regard.

      Resolved:

      1. That feedback is being awaited on the matter regarding the availability of the necessary capacity and skills to do germination tests on groundnut seed.

         Chairperson
         SAGF

8. Industry information and marketing aspects

   1. SAGIS: General feedback and market information

      Mr Hawkins presented an overview of the latest groundnut information, as compiled by SAGIS. He said the information included, inter alia, data on the national and international supply and demand, local production figures, data on imports and exports, data on international and local stocks as well as parity and international prices and food prices. He added that the information was published on the SAGIS website (www.sagis.org.za).

      Mr Hawkins conveyed SAGIS' gratitude for the inputs delivered by the various co-workers, as well as those delivered by the members of the Groundnut Forum and the various associations in the industry. He also acknowledged the contributions of the SAGIS Board of Directors.

      The members took cognisance of the market information SAGIS had compiled for the Groundnut Forum, of the weekly bulletin dated 28 March and of the monthly bulletin, dated 25 March 2013.

   2. Crop and Area estimates

      Cognisance was taken of the document reflecting the second production estimate for summer crops for the 2013 production season.

      The Chairperson called on Ms Beukes to elucidate on the information. Ms Beukes said according to the second production estimate, 46 900 hectares had been planted to groundnuts, with an expected crop of 57 900 tons, which was slightly less than the previous season's crop of 59 000 tons.

      Ms Beukes provided a breakdown of the country's groundnut plantings per province in the 2013 production year. Cognisance was taken that 20 000 hectares had been planted in the Northwest Province, with an expected crop of 16 000 tons, while it was forecast that 21 600 tons of groundnuts would be produced on 18 000 hectares in the Free State, and 18 200 tons would be produced on 7 000 hectares in the Northern Cape. She added that approximately 9 000 hectares or 20% of the groundnut plantings during the current season were under irrigation.

      Ms Beukes said the current crop estimate was 27,5% less than the previous five years' average crop of 79 910 tons, and 24,9% less than the previous ten years' average crop of 77 056 tons. She noted that an average yield of 1,23 tons per hectare was forecast, as opposed to the five and ten years' average yield of 1,50 tons per hectare.

      Ms Beukes also presented an overview of historical trends in the local groundnut industry from 1981 to 2013.

      The Chairperson invited comments on the crop estimates for the various production areas. Mr van Wyk said in his view, the country would not achieve a total groundnut production of 57 900 tons. Mr Higgs remarked that it was a well known fact that the drought in the Northwest and Free State provinces would impact negatively on dryland crops in those areas. He said he had been informed that the average groundnut yields in the Northern Cape, as well as the quality of the groundnuts, would not live up to expectations.

      Mr Visser said in his view, an average of 0,7 ton per hectare would be produced under dryland conditions, and cautioned that any number of plantings could very well be written off, for the first time in many years.

      Mr Nortjé noted that certain producers in the GWK-area, who had planted their groundnuts under irrigation and early in the production season, had harvested average yields in excess of 4 tons per hectare.

      Mr Visser remarked that groundnut production would have to be promoted vigorously, after a disappointing production year. He said it was important that all the role players in the industry joined in the effort to keep the groundnut industry afloat, as many groundnut producers would suffer severe losses.

9. Research

   1. Study: Sustainability of the groundnut industry

      (Resolutions 9.1.1 and 9.1.2 of the SA Groundnut Forum minutes of 31 October 2012)

      The Chairperson remarked that he had not received any feedback on the generic groundnut marketing initiative. He said Mr Jan du Preez had agreed to compile a regular newsletter on developments in the local sunflower, soybean and groundnut industries, and would attend the meetings of the Forum, with that purpose in mind.

      Ms Salomon confirmed that producers were being alerted to groundnut production information that was relevant and important during specific periods in the production year, by means of regular articles in the SAGrain. She said positive feedback was being received from the producers.

      Ms Salomon said the updated groundnut production manual would most probably be available before the 2014/2015 production season.

      Noted:

      1. That cognisance be taken that the updated groundnut production manual would most probably be available before the 2014-2015 production season.

         Ms Salomon
         SAGF

10. Additional items

    1. Articles

       Cognisance was taken of the articles "Peulaalwurms 'maak nes' in grond-boonsaad", "Die stories en die feite oor GM-voedsel" en "Ongunstige oes-toestande in Suid-Amerika en lae voorrade veroorsaak volatiliteit".

    2. Farm audits: PPECB

       Cognisance was taken of Mr Lourens de Kock's feedback on the PPECB Groundnut Pre-season meeting, as detailed in his letter dated 25 March 2013, and appended as Annexure I. The Chairperson called on Mr de Kock to elucidate on the matter.

       Mr de Kock reported that the issue of farm audits had been discussed at some length at the Pre-season meeting, and that various viewpoints had been raised. He said at the end of the meeting, it had been concluded that the issue had not been communicated effectively to the producers, and that it had been suggested that a special planning meeting be called, so that the implementation of the farm audits could be discussed thoroughly. He reported that Bothaville had been sug-gested as a suitable location for the meeting.

       Mr de Kock referred to the document "Terms of Reference (TOR) of the Grains and Oilseeds Food Safety Forum", appended as Annexure J. He said according to the TOR, one of the objectives of the Forum would be "to bring key stakeholders (in the area of food safety) together on a regular basis to discuss issues relating to grains and oilseeds products' safety." He added that this strengthened the view that a special planning meeting should be held with the producers.

       Mr Heilbron agreed with the suggestion that a special planning meeting should be called. He said although the matter of farm audits had been communicated thoroughly to the processors, the producers had not yet been sufficiently informed on the purpose of the farm audits, and on the aspects that would be emphasised during the audit. He emphasised the need for an independent chairperson or body to lead and conduct the meeting.

       Mr van Wyk said the term "farm audit" needed to be defined properly, and the extent and benefits of such audits fully explained.

       Mr Visser reported that GrainSA's Specialist Groundnut Work Group had also indicated that clarity had to be obtained on the whole issue. He said the question had specifically been raised as to why groundnuts should be subjected to farm audits, and not maize, sunflower and so forth. He raised his concern that those audits would result in a further decrease in groundnut plantings locally.

       Following on a protracted debate on the issue, the costs involved, etcetera, Mr Mosome reminded the members of the reasons why it had been considered necessary to implement farm audits, and why the members of the Groundnut Forum had supported the implementation of farm audits.

       The Chairperson noted that the matter of farm audits have been discussed at some length, at various meetings over the past two years or so. He said it was clear that a lot of uncertainty still clouded the issue of farm audits, and that certain practicalities had to be clarified, at a special meeting or workshop, that should be attended by representatives from the industry as a whole. He remarked that DAFF and the PPECB could provide the attendees with the necessary background information, so that the issue could be debated and finalised.

       Mr Nerwich said as far as he was concerned, such a meeting or workshop would be a waste of time, as producers had to be encouraged and not discouraged, to plant groundnuts. Ms van Deventer remarked that she did not necessarily support or not support the idea of a workshop, but that she still considered it essential that all the facts be put on the table, so that the producers could decide for themselves whether or not to produce groundnuts.

       Mr Visser said the whole spectrum of producers had to be represented at the meeting, so that practical solutions could be identified. Mr Higgs suggested that the meeting be organised for August. Mr Heilbron said the audits had to be conducted during the harvest season, and added that he intended to adhere to the action plan, as explained at the previous Forum meeting.

       Mr Louw mentioned that it was decided at a previous Forum meeting to accept the 20:80 principle, and that the processors would be requested to communicate the matter to the producers. He said GrainSA had provided all the relevant checklists to all its producer members, and had also informed them that the process would be handled via the processors, as they had contracts with the groundnut producers. He asked why the current season could not be used as pilot season, following which the workshop could be organised. He said a presentation could be done at the workshop on what had happened at farm level, and what problems and risks had been identified.

       Mr Visser supported the suggestion. He suggested that the process should commence on the farms of those producers who did not produce on an extensive, commercial scale.

       Mr Mosome suggested that the office of the DAFF executive be advised in writing on the way the Forum intended to approach the matter of farm audits.

       The Chairperson said the matter would be discussed with some of the processors, as it was clear that the members were not in full agreement on the matter of farm audits. Mr Louw said the matter had been listed for discussion at the meeting of the GrainSA's Specialist Groundnut Work Group on 28 May, and would also be attended by Mr Heilbron.

       The Chairperson confirmed that the current season would be used as a pilot season, as suggested, and that a workshop or meeting would be organised, if necessary, later in the year. He said he would also contact DAFF, so that a few issues could be clarified.

       Resolved:

       1. That the current production season would be used as a pilot season for the implementation of farm audits, following which a workshop or meeting would be organised, if necessary, so as to discuss the problems and risks identified during the pilot study audits.

          Chairperson

    3. Export regulations

       Mr Visser remarked that DAFF's regulations did not provide for natural oil stains, a characteristic of certain groundnut cultivars, such as Kwarts and the new elite runner types, with the result that those groundnuts were discriminated against, and graded as stained nuts. He suggested that the description of stained nuts be amended, so as to make allowance for natural oil stains as a characteristic of certain cultivars.

       Mr Mosome said if there were consensus from all the stakeholders, DAFF could be requested to amend the regulations accordingly. He suggested that Mr Visser approach DAFF with a formal request to amend the regulations, following which he would initiate the consultation process with all stakeholders.

       Noted:

       1. That DAFF would be approached with a formal request to amend the relevant regulations, so as to make provision for natural oil stains, as a characteristic of certain groundnut cultivars. DAFF will initiate the consultation process with all stakeholders.

          Mr Visser
          Mr Mosome
          SAGF

    4. Joint Food Safety Forum

       Cognisance was taken of the final draft agenda of the Joint Food Safety Forum and MRL Work Group that was held on 12 March 2013, the draft minutes of that meeting, as well as the document titled "Terms of Reference of the Grains and Oilseeds Food Safety Forum".

       Mr Mosome said the Joint Food Safety Forum, that had been established a number of years ago, was to a large extent dominated by the fruit industry. He mentioned that he had, for that reason, tabled the TOR document at the March meeting, with the view to creating a separate platform for grains and oilseeds.

       Mr Mosome said although his suggestion had not been accepted, it had been resolved that grains and oilseeds food safety issues would be the first item listed for discussion at future meetings of the Joint Safety Forum. Ms Campbell remarked that representatives of those industries that had a vested interest in exports would be invited to attend the Joint Food Safety Forum meetings.

    5. Abolishment of import duty on raw nuts

       Mr Nerwich said an import duty of 10% was introduced a number of years ago, to protect the local groundnut industry, at a time when the annual production of groundnuts locally was still at fairly high levels. He noted that times have changed, that the total annual crops have shrunk, and that local producers did not need to be protected anymore.

       Mr Louw said GrainSA would definitely oppose such an initiative. The Chairperson said matters like these could not be driven by the Groundnut Forum.

       Mr Nerwich said raw groundnuts were mostly imported from the SADC countries, and were not subject to import duties. He added that he was referring to large jumbo peanuts that were not produced in South Africa.

    6. Presentation: PPECB Laboratory improvements and services

       Dr Naicker presented a short overview and update of the latest developments at the PPECB Laboratory, that had relocated during February 2012, had gone into voluntary suspension, and were reinstated by SANAS only two weeks later, which process usually lasted three months. She noted that the members of the Forum, as stakeholders in the industry, were welcome to visit the laboratory. She added that comments and criticisms would be welcomed.

       Dr Naicker presented a summary of the various critical processes that were in place at the laboratory. She explained what elements were in place, to ensure that a reliable and uninterrupted service could be offered. She said the laboratory was always trying to improve its systems.

       Mr Nerwich thanked Dr Naicker for a very well put together presentation, and for all she was doing for the industry. He added that tremendous improvements had been noted, especially over the last 12 months.

11. Meeting dates 2013

    The next meeting will be held on 30 July 2013.

12. Adjournment

    The Chairperson thanked the members of the Forum for their attendance at, and contributions to the meeting, and wished all a safe journey home. There being no further business to discuss, the meeting was adjourned at 14:00.