Evidence of meeting #18 for Agriculture and Agri-Food in the 39th Parliament, 1st Session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was program.

A recording is available from Parliament.

On the agenda

MPs speaking

Also speaking

Gary Koivisto  Executive Director, Plant Products Directorate, Canadian Food Inspection Agency
Bashir Manji  Acting Director, Food of Plant Origin Division, Canadian Food Inspection Agency
Len Troup  President, Ontario Fruit and Vegetable Growers' Association
Marcus Janzen  President, Canadian Horticultural Council
Bob Friesen  President, Canadian Federation of Agriculture
Brenda Lammens  Vice-Chair, Ontario Fruit and Vegetable Growers' Association

11:05 a.m.

Bloc

André Bellavance Bloc Richmond—Arthabaska, QC

I'll be brief, Mr. Chairman. I'd simply like to seek the committee's unanimous consent. All committee members did in fact receive a letter from potato growers. You're aware of what transpired in the Saint-Amable region. The US embargo has been lifted, which is very good news. However, some growers—in particular the ones in Saint-Amable—are still experiencing some problems.

We had planned on hearing from them. I think we'll have time for that on Thursday, because representatives of the Canadian Wheat Board cannot be here. You even mentioned the possibility of having them testify tomorrow, Mr. Chairman. I know we'll be hearing from some Americans. Perhaps we could set aside an hour for that. I'd like the consent of my colleagues to set aside one hour this week to hear representations from the Saint-Amable growers.

11:05 a.m.

Conservative

The Chair Conservative Gerry Ritz

Mr. Bellavance is asking for some time at either tomorrow's meeting or at Thursday's meeting to accommodate witnesses from the affected area.

Go ahead, Mr. Easter.

11:05 a.m.

Liberal

Wayne Easter Liberal Malpeque, PE

I wonder if there is time to get them in tomorrow, because they have to come in, André. I have no problem with finding an hour. I know that the decision was just made. When you brought it forward to us originally, I don't think farmers were, at that time, ready to come in.

But it is kind of an urgent matter, Mr. Chair. I think the clerk was trying to fill in Thursday. Maybe we could take an hour there, even if we have to add on a little time, to accommodate André.

11:05 a.m.

Conservative

The Chair Conservative Gerry Ritz

Sure.

We'll have Jacques.

11:05 a.m.

Conservative

Jacques Gourde Conservative Lotbinière—Chutes-de-la-Chaudière, QC

Negotiations are under way with the Canadian Food Inspection Agency to identify growers. Perhaps we could postpone making a decision until Thursday, so as not to hurt growers in the Saint-Amable region who have been affected.

11:05 a.m.

Conservative

The Chair Conservative Gerry Ritz

Go ahead, André.

11:05 a.m.

Bloc

André Bellavance Bloc Richmond—Arthabaska, QC

On the contrary, they have asked to speak about the current situation as soon as possible

Mr. Gourde brought this matter up himself at the beginning of the session. If I don't get the committee's unanimous consent, I will table a 48-hour notice of motion as soon as possible, namely today.

11:05 a.m.

Conservative

Jacques Gourde Conservative Lotbinière—Chutes-de-la-Chaudière, QC

Right now, the Canadian Food Inspection Agency is drawing up a list of all growers affected by the problem.

You may have received their request, but plans are being made. At the very least, we should wait until Thursday or early next week to see if they are satisfied with the arrangements.

11:05 a.m.

Bloc

André Bellavance Bloc Richmond—Arthabaska, QC

If they are given the opportunity to testify, they'll tell us what they need.

As I said, unanimous consent is required if we are to hear from them on Thursday. If I cannot get it, I will table a motion to that effect later today.

11:05 a.m.

Conservative

The Chair Conservative Gerry Ritz

Just for clarification, Jacques, are you talking about holding off and doing this as part of our meeting on Thursday, or holding off discussing it until Thursday?

It's the second.

11:05 a.m.

Conservative

Jacques Gourde Conservative Lotbinière—Chutes-de-la-Chaudière, QC

We'll have to dispose of Mr. Bellavance's motion on Thursday. Until then, negotiations will continue. We'll get an idea of the number of growers affected and we'll be better able to assess their problems. We would be jumping the gun if we were to hear representations from the Saint-Amable growers on Thursday. Negotiations are currently under way with the department. The situation for growers is likely to change between Thursday and the beginning of next week.

In my opinion, we would be better off waiting at least until Thursday.

11:05 a.m.

Conservative

The Chair Conservative Gerry Ritz

André.

11:05 a.m.

Bloc

André Bellavance Bloc Richmond—Arthabaska, QC

To sum up, Mr. Chairman, despite Jacques' remarks, the letter that all committee members received was sent to the clerk yesterday at 2:16 p.m. All committee members are mentioned. In their letter, the growers ask to appear before us as soon as possible. That is the reason for my request. We've been in contact with the growers and they want to describe their plight to us. That is the reason why I asked that we meet with them as soon as possible.

11:05 a.m.

Conservative

Jacques Gourde Conservative Lotbinière—Chutes-de-la-Chaudière, QC

It's really important to wait at least two days.

11:05 a.m.

Conservative

The Chair Conservative Gerry Ritz

Okay, so we will put it on the meeting for Thursday.

André, can you put forward that you've actually sent in a letter of notice and the motion is already being tabled? Great. We'll discuss it Thursday, then. Thank you.

Mr. Easter.

11:10 a.m.

Liberal

Wayne Easter Liberal Malpeque, PE

On a second point, Mr. Chair, I just want to make sure you have a second motion there, for that 48-hour notice for Thursday. The three opposition parties have come together in response to several unprecedented, unethical, and undemocratic actions taken against the Canadian Wheat Board, and we'll be undertaking an emergency review at this committee of the government's actions next week, on October 24, 25, and 26. A list of witnesses is attached.

Do you have that?

11:10 a.m.

Conservative

The Chair Conservative Gerry Ritz

I do have that motion. We'll be discussing it on Thursday, as I understand.

11:10 a.m.

Liberal

Wayne Easter Liberal Malpeque, PE

Thanks, yes.

11:10 a.m.

Conservative

The Chair Conservative Gerry Ritz

Anyone else?

Gary.

11:10 a.m.

Gary Koivisto Executive Director, Plant Products Directorate, Canadian Food Inspection Agency

Thank you for this opportunity to appear before the House of Commons Standing Committee on Agriculture and Agri-Food.

Today, I would like to provide an overview of the Canadian Food Inspection Agency's mandate as it relates to plant health and the international movement of plants and plant products. I will also do my best to answer any questions committee members may have.

The CFIA is a science-based organization that adheres to international standards. This has a profound influence on the CFIA's policies, decisions, and actions. The CFIA has a prominent role in international phytosanitary policy and standard-setting related to trade in plants and plant products. The agency also provides a range of support services to importers and exporters, such as risk analysis, inspection, and certification.

To fulfill its mandate as it relates to plant health, the CFIA represents Canada on a number of international bodies, such as the International Plant Protection Convention and the North American Plant Protection Organization. Again, our involvement with these organizations is strictly limited to scientific concerns, such as devising effective standards and providing technical assistance.

Our role in international trade relates directly to the CFIA's mandate: safeguarding the food supply and Canada's crops and forests. The CFIA's role in trade is of crucial importance to Canada, because exports contribute to the prosperity of Canadians and imports provide a year-round supply of products that Canadians demand. The annual economic value of trade in plants and plant products to Canada is $9.3 billion for imports and $21.8 billion for exports.

Global trade depends absolutely on international trust and adherence to international standards. As members of this committee know all too well, trading nations adhere to several protocols, treaties, and conventions to facilitate the safe and profitable exchange of goods and services. Canada is among the 159 countries that abide by the International Plant Protection Convention. In essence, this agreement oversees the import and export of thousands of plants and plant products. It secures actions to prevent the spread and introduction of pests, plants, and plant products and promotes measures for their control. Adhering to IPPC in Canada under the Plant Protection Act and regulations is part of the CFIA's mandate.

The stated purpose of the Plant Protection Act and regulations is to prevent pests and diseases injurious to plants from being imported into Canada, from spreading within the country, and from being exported out of it. The act also provides for controlling and eradicating pests and diseases and for certifying the pest- and disease-free status of plants and plant material.

To explain what this work involves, I will address exports and imports separately.

Under the Plant Protection Act and regulations, exporters are required to ensure that shipments meet standards and import requirements set by the importing foreign country. These standards vary according to the product and destination country. Canada strives to meet these requirements on a day-to-day basis.

To demonstrate compliance with standards of individual countries, an exporter must obtain a phytosanitary certificate. In Canada, CFIA staff recognized as authorized certification officers—men and women with demonstrated expertise in IPPC standards and inspection protocols—are the only ones who can issue these plant health certificates.

Each year, the CFlA issues up to 70,000 phytosanitary certificates for the export of seeds, cereals, fruits, and vegetables, along with nursery, greenhouse, and forestry products. Each certificate represents Canada's guarantee that the products meet the other country's import requirements. This assurance facilitates international trade and helps to maintain the excellent international reputation of the health of Canadian plants and plant products.

An indication of the CFIA's success in this area is that only in a tiny fraction of all cases representing less than one-tenth of 1% of all certificates issued does an importing country report that a shipment may not meet its entry requirements. This remarkable success rate helps to strengthen Canada's position in international markets.

The CFIA also facilitates exports in other ways. We operate an export unit that collects information on each country and product, and we maintain an export certification system that is continually updated to reflect current conditions. This unit also acts as the main contact for the resolution of phytosanitary issues, and acts to resolve disputes related to the application of foreign import requirements at foreign ports of entry.

On the import side, CFIA also plays a similarly multifaceted role, ensuring compliance with Canadian regulations to prevent the entry and spread of plant pests into Canada. The CFIA strives to restrict the entry of regulated diseases and pests into Canada in a number of ways, such as by conducting risk analyses, ensuring that pest risk mitigation measures have been applied at origin, conducting inspections, and implementing effective import controls. These controls range from the issuance of plant health import permits and the inspection of imported commodities to surveillance activities.

All of the CFIA's decisions about control mechanisms are based on a scientific analysis of potential risk. One of our most common analytical tools is the pest risk assessment. This tool identifies hazards and characterizes the associated risks of introduction and establishment, as well as the severity of economic and environmental impacts. The analysis of various risk mitigation options is used to establish the Canadian import requirements.

The CFIA works closely with its counterparts in the United States and Mexico through the North American Plant Protection Organization, or NAPPO, an IPPC regional organization. We regularly chair panels to set plant health standards, and we serve on numerous technical panels and technical advisory groups.

A number of those regional standards serve as a basis for the creation of international standards. The CFIA also develops certification programs and protocols that are adopted in other countries.

When it comes to its role in import, export and standard setting, the CFIA operates in a transparent, impartial and independent manner. The CFIA consults regularly with stakeholders, including farmers, importers and exporters, and we make all of our regulatory decisions based on science, in accordance with our mandate and international obligations.

Mr. Chairman, the CFIA does its utmost to fulfill its mandate. We recognize that foreign diseases, pests, and invasive species can have devastating impacts on Canada's food supply and on the plants and animals that contribute to the health and prosperity of Canadians. We will continue to protect Canada's agriculture and forestry sectors by preventing foreign plant pests from entering Canada and from spreading throughout our country. We must also continue to protect the integrity of our phytosanitary certification export program. To achieve these objectives, we will continue to rely on scientific data and collaborate closely with our domestic and international partners.

Once again, thank you, Mr. Chairman, for allowing me the time to speak before your committee.

11:15 a.m.

Conservative

The Chair Conservative Gerry Ritz

Mr. Manji, do you have anything to add?

11:15 a.m.

Bashir Manji Acting Director, Food of Plant Origin Division, Canadian Food Inspection Agency

I have nothing to add at this moment.

11:15 a.m.

Conservative

The Chair Conservative Gerry Ritz

Great. Thank you, sir.

We'll open the round of questioning.

Mr. Boshcoff, for seven minutes, please.

11:15 a.m.

Liberal

Ken Boshcoff Liberal Thunder Bay—Rainy River, ON

Thank you very much.

Gentlemen, you may be aware that there has been a severe drought this year in the northwestern part of Ontario. The Federation of Agriculture has actually written to both the federal and provincial ministers, advising that the drought conditions were so severe that they would like the area to be declared a disaster area. It has meant that some farmers are required to get hay from the Americans. And it's the same geographical area; you can't tell the difference if you're in Minnesota or that part of northwestern Ontario.

We're talking about inspections here and, because of the policies that CFIA has, about raising the cost from a $70-per-certificate inspection to $450. Of course, that raises the cost of the hay to almost $10 a bale, even though if you went through a cereal leaf beetle area in southern Ontario at this time and delivered it to Manitoba, you wouldn't have to get it inspected. So there are some very amazing anomalies here. I know you're familiar with the case in which the USDA has already cleared the area and certified it to be free of cereal leaf beetle.

When we talk about process, either of international cooperation or assisting farmers in that, we're talking about a huge additional expense, an unconscionable amount of time delay, and just the whole system of putting someone through that when we know they're in an emergency situation. Knowing that it's free of this pest and has been so certified, the farm community wonders why, when you have a homogeneous quantity, it has to be bureaucratized and be certified each time, even though it's from the same source.

Could either one of you perhaps address that?

11:20 a.m.

Executive Director, Plant Products Directorate, Canadian Food Inspection Agency

Gary Koivisto

Thank you for the question.

I will commence by saying I am familiar with this particular situation in northwestern Ontario. I wasn't aware of the drought conditions, but it certainly would be a good indicator as to the driver for why the demand for hay has shifted to south of the border and into Minnesota.

The pest of concern that we are talking about with this particular shipment is the cereal leaf beetle. Although the cereal leaf beetle is established throughout several parts of Canada, it is not in northwestern Ontario, nor is it widely established on the Prairies, where it would be the most serious pest. So that is the pest of concern, and that's why we have the program in place.

In Minnesota, you are correct that the cereal leaf beetle is not in the northern parts of the state from where this particular farmer wants to source his hay, but it is in the southern part of the state. What we are looking for, then, would be the assurance that it does in fact meet our requirement of either freedom from cereal leaf beetle or being grown in an area free from cereal leaf beetle. The mechanism by which we do that and recognize that is the phytosanitary certificate.

In the case of the United States, it's quite often state agents who will in fact do the inspections and issue the certificates, and I believe that is the case with Minnesota. In that state, they do have a cost recovery program in place, thus triggering the costs.

Another part of your question deals with the length of time it takes for an inspection to take place. Given all of that, I do hear exactly what you're saying. I have asked my staff—this week even—to take advantage of a meeting they're at with their USDA colleagues and to discuss this with the USDA office and ask them to work with the Minnesota Department of Agriculture to see if there might be an alternate way of providing that phytosanitary certificate without having to do that travel each time and adding on those additional costs. So I've already triggered that to take place, in order to see if we can expedite it and to make it in a more prudent efficient manner. Hopefully some of these cost savings could then be passed on.