Evidence of meeting #33 for Agriculture and Agri-Food in the 40th Parliament, 2nd Session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was standards.
A recording is available from Parliament.
3:30 p.m.
Conservative
3:30 p.m.
Bloc
André Bellavance Bloc Richmond—Arthabaska, QC
Thank you, Mr. Chair.
Could we set aside a few minutes at the end of the meeting to debate my motion? Mr. Atamanenko also has a motion, but mine has to do with inviting Mr. De Schutter to appear before the committee by video conference on October 27. That is why I want to discuss it today. It won't take long, but I would appreciate some time at the end of the meeting to debate my motion.
3:30 p.m.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Larry Miller
It's at the discretion of the committee. We have five delegations in the first part, and then a couple afterwards, so....
We have a number of motions to be dealt with. There are five or six.
I believe, André, unless there's unanimous consent, we'd have to deal with them in the order that they came in. But if the committee agrees, then....
Do you want to comment on that?
3:30 p.m.
Bloc
André Bellavance Bloc Richmond—Arthabaska, QC
We would ask him to appear on October 27. Mr. De Schutter was supposed to go before the Committee on International Trade, but his appearance was cancelled. I think that the Standing Committee on Agriculture and Agri-Food would be a good forum in which to present his food safety report. It would be on October 27, and today is October 20. That is why I wanted to deal with it today.
3:30 p.m.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Larry Miller
So you're saying he's already in Ottawa that day. Is that what you are suggesting?
3:30 p.m.
Bloc
André Bellavance Bloc Richmond—Arthabaska, QC
He was available to appear by video conference. I think he was in Geneva, but he was available when the Standing Committee on International Trade was going to meet. That does not work anymore. He has to talk to his office in order to appear before our committee on October 27 from 3:30 p.m. to 5:30 p.m.
3:30 p.m.
Liberal
Wayne Easter Liberal Malpeque, PE
Mr. Chair, there are some motions on there from me as well. I would leave those aside. Alex's and André's motions are the ones we need to deal with. I think they're of an urgent nature.
3:30 p.m.
Conservative
Bev Shipley Conservative Lambton—Kent—Middlesex, ON
Actually, I had a motion in that we haven't talked about yet. It has to do with young farmers.
I don't know that it's fair to start picking and choosing whose motions are important to get on the list. We have a number of motions. Certainly the discussion that we've had around here on competitiveness is as much about young farmers. Let's get to the end of it and we'll decide at the end. I think we should get an agreement on how we're going to move ahead on these motions.
3:30 p.m.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Larry Miller
Okay.
Could I take here from the discussion, then, that we keep a couple minutes at the end to further this and not delay our witnesses any longer? Is everybody fine with that?
3:30 p.m.
Some hon. members
Agreed.
3:30 p.m.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Larry Miller
Thank you.
Just before we call our first witnesses, I'll remind you that today's meeting is a study on the fusarium issue. As requested by the steering committee, at Thursday's meeting we'll have witnesses here on competitiveness and producer car loading. We have the CN, Canadian Wheat Board, an individual named Mr. Cam Goff, and Transport Canada. We continue with competitiveness next week.
Mr. Atamanenko.
3:35 p.m.
NDP
Alex Atamanenko NDP British Columbia Southern Interior, BC
I don't want to prolong the discussion. I just want to confirm that we will look at my proposal because my motion is time-sensitive.
3:35 p.m.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Larry Miller
We're going to have a few minutes saved at the end, Alex, to deal with business. It's up to you members what issues are discussed.
I'm first going to call our witnesses. We have Mr. Derek Jamieson and Mr. Gordon Harrison, with P & H Milling Group.
I would ask you gentlemen—this is to all the witnesses—to please keep your presentations to ten minutes or less, for the sake of time. Much less would be even better, but we'll leave that up to you.
Go ahead, Mr. Jamieson.
3:35 p.m.
Derek Jamieson Vice-President, P & H Milling Group
Thank you.
Good afternoon, Mr. Chairman and members of the committee. My name is Derek Jamieson, and I am representing P & H Milling Group, a division of Parrish & Heimbecker Limited, at the invitation of this committee.
Parrish & Heimbecker is a privately held, Canadian-owned company. Parrish & Heimbecker Milling Group was formed following the acquisition of Dover Industries Limited by Parrish & Heimbecker in February of this year.
The P & H Milling Group consists of the combined milling assets of Dover Flour, New-Life Mills Limited, Ellison Milling Company, and Parrheim Foods, operating seven flour mills in five provinces across Canada, as well as a pea processing facility in Saskatchewan.
I also serve as the chair of the Canadian National Millers Association technical committee, and I am accompanied today by Mr. Gordon Harrison, president of the CNMA.
I would like to thank the committee for the opportunity to present our views on recent events and background surrounding fusarium-infected wheat. Fusarium is a fungal disease that can occur in wheat and other grains and is more likely to develop if moist warm conditions occur during the flowering stage. The disease produces a mycotoxin on the kernels of wheat, commonly referred to as vomitoxin, or DON.
For many years, this disease was more prevalent in the wheat-growing areas of Ontario and other eastern provinces; however, it is becoming a greater concern in the wheat-growing areas of western Canada, where the majority of Canada's wheat is grown.
One of the impacts of fusarium is blighted or bleached kernels. This can affect the entire kernel or a portion of the kernel, and it is visible to the trained eye. The presence of fusarium-damaged kernels, or FDK, is a grading factor in Canada, and as such the top grades--1, 2, and 3 of Canadian Western Red Spring, for example--are permitted a quarter of a per cent, one per cent, and two per cent fusarium-damaged kernels respectively.
The significance of this is that the Canada Grain Act, through grading standards established by the Canadian Grain Commission, recognizes that fusarium not only exists in the main milling grades used by Canadian flour mills but is in fact permitted in the main milling grades used by Canadian flour mills.
I would like to emphasize that if there are FDK kernels present, there will be vomitoxin, or DON, present as well, and so by interpretation, the Canada Grain Act recognizes and accepts the presence of DON in wheat. I would also stress that while the presence of FDK indicates that DON will be present, there is no proven linear relationship. As an example, one per cent fusarium-damaged kernels does not predict a consistent level of DON.
Currently there are no regulations in Canada governing or restricting the level of DON in hard wheat, which is primarily used for bread and other yeast-leavened products. Canada first established guidelines for soft wheat in the 1980s, and the current guideline is for two parts per million in uncleaned soft wheat for non-staple foods and one part per million in uncleaned soft wheat for use in baby foods.
In light of the absence of hard wheat guidelines, the P & H Milling Group has adopted voluntary guidelines for hard wheat that mirror those in place for soft wheat. Approximately one year ago, as a consequence of discussions regarding Health Canada's proposed guidelines for ochratoxin A, we became aware that Health Canada was also embarking on a process to establish additional guidelines for vomitoxin in grain in Canada. This news was neither a surprise nor a concern to us. The flour milling industry is on record as asking Health Canada for hard wheat guidelines since 1994.
Furthermore, P & H Milling Group, along with several other mills in Canada, participated in a voluntary project in 2005 with Health Canada to assist it in supplying samples of grain, flour, and bran for a study of vomitoxin in Canadian grain and flour.
More recently, also through discussions around proposed guidelines for OTA, we learned of stepped-up compliance and enforcement activities by the Canadian Food Inspection Agency. This involves the monitoring of levels of OTA and DON at processing locations, including flour mills and further processors such as breakfast cereal manufacturers. Flour, bran, and other product samples are being shipped to CFIA labs in Burnaby for analysis, and results are being reported back to mills in approximately three to six weeks.
It is the CFIA's current compliance and enforcement activity that is giving rise to a great deal of uncertainty for millers and producers. This activity was begun without prior consultation with industry to advise us of the specific levels of OTA and DON that would be considered to be excessive.
This would have been an important step to take, considering the OTA guidelines are only at the proposal stage and that Health Canada's limited guidelines for DON that apply to soft wheat only are clearly indicated on the department's website as being under review.
The CFIA is an auditor of industry best practices, while industry is responsible to carry out these practices. We require regulations that are clear and guidelines that are meaningful and achievable in order to meet these responsibilities. Since there are no guidelines for either OTA or DON in either federal laws or regulations, the milling industry has been seeking clarification on CFIA's current enforcement policy.
In response to persistent inquiries from the Canadian National Millers Association and other industry sources, CFIA has provided conflicting advice to both industry and Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada. In some written and oral communication to millers and further processors, CFIA has advised that Health Canada intends to adopt the EU guidelines for DON and that the agency is therefore applying a maximum limit of 0.75 parts per million.
In other written and oral communication, CFIA has advised that since there are no established guidelines for OTA and DON, they are taking a zero tolerance approach, meaning that where laboratory analysis indicates the presence of either mycotoxin the results will be referred to the bureau of chemical safety, food directorate, Health Canada, for risk assessment.
We have no issue with these monitoring activities, and we support Health Canada's objective of proposing new guidelines for DON. We recognize and endorse these efforts to ensure the safety of Canada's food supply. However, we are alarmed and concerned about being subject to enforcement over guidelines that do not exist.
We are equally concerned that our industry, with other industry stakeholders, has taken several steps and opportunities to engage Health Canada and the CFIA to alleviate these concerns and to find interim solutions with very few tangible results so far. My colleague Mr. Harrison will address these concerns in more detail.
I suggest that given this atmosphere of uncertainty and a lack of any interim guidance from Health Canada or the CFIA, it is not surprising that some misunderstandings arose during the recent harvest in eastern Canada. These are the unwanted consequences of heightened concerns and a lack of collaborative efforts to bring solutions that benefit and protect every participant, from the grower to the consumer.
Thank you for this opportunity to present my views.
3:40 p.m.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Larry Miller
Thank you very much, and thank you for staying well under the time.
Now we'll have the Western Canadian Wheat Growers--
3:40 p.m.
Gordon Harrison President, Canadian National Millers Association, P & H Milling Group
Mr. Chairman, I wonder if I might take no more than two minutes to highlight two points.
3:40 p.m.
President, Canadian National Millers Association, P & H Milling Group
Thank you.
I think it's important that the committee note that while this hearing is around fusarium and it is triggered by events in P.E.I., Health Canada and CFIA are concerned about two mycotoxins in cereal grains, DON and ochratoxin A, and CFIA's compliance and enforcement activity is around both.
The second key point I'd like to make is that the compliance and enforcement activity has resulted in interventions at establishments at retail, milling, and a breakfast cereal manufacturing plant. So the uncertainty, the business risk, that producers and processors face is very real because it has resulted in very significant interventions so far.
Of major concern to the milling industry is the apparent disconnect between this activity and what we understood to be the significance of the Canada Grain Act and regulations and grading standards. We understood historically that the grading standards deemed milling wheat, graded as milling wheat, to be fit as milling wheat. At issue for us is the fact that after the fact, when milling wheat has been delivered to a mill and ownership is taken by a mill, this CFIA activity calls into question its suitability.
Finally, Derek spoke about process and the need for constructive dialogue. I think the committee should note that after a lot of discussions and representations with CFIA and Health Canada, we have proposed, as industry, a very comprehensive working group. It was proposed a week ago Friday. It's significant that both Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada and Health Canada have agreed to form this working group, so to the best of our knowledge we finally have an appropriate forum in which all interests--producers, processors, handling, and transportation--will be represented.
Thank you.
3:45 p.m.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Larry Miller
Thank you very much.
Before we move on, I should have announced that we have Mr. Allan Ling, Ms. Monique McTiernan, and Mr. David Mol by video conference from Charlottetown.
Welcome, lady and gentlemen.
We'll move on next to the Western Canadian Wheat Growers Association, and we have Mr. Geoff Hewson and Mr. Blair Rutter.
3:45 p.m.
Geoff Hewson Vice-President, Saskatchewan, Western Canadian Wheat Growers Association
Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman and members of the committee, for the opportunity to present our views on the issues surrounding fusarium head blight.
Just a little bit about me: I am Saskatchewan vice-president of the Western Canadian Wheat Growers Association and, along with my family, farm 7,500 acres in southeastern Saskatchewan.
In our presentation today we wish to focus on three areas. First, we'll talk about the grading standards that we face. Second, we'll talk about the need for a greater research effort into the development of more fusarium-resistant varieties in wheat and other cereals. Last, we'll discuss the possible new standards for vomitoxin or DON for the Canadian milling industry.
Fusarium head blight is one of the most serious quality issues facing wheat producers in Manitoba and eastern Saskatchewan. The stringent grading standards in place have contributed to a shift away from wheat acreage in the eastern prairies. For example, wheat acreage in Manitoba has declined by 40% in the 15 years since the first serious outbreak of fusarium occurred in 1993. By comparison, wheat acreage in Alberta has declined by only 15% over the same time period.
In recent years a more virulent strain of fusarium has become more prevalent on the prairies. According to the Canadian Grain Commission, this new strain accounted for 68% of all fusarium infections on the prairies in 2007, up from 6% a decade earlier. At one time there was a good level of correlation between the fusarium-damaged kernel count and the degree of vomitoxin or DON in the resulting flower. However, with this new strain, there is less predictability and less correlation between the level of kernel damage and the level of DON. As a result, we understand the Grain Commission is considering the tightening of grade tolerances for fusarium-infected wheat. Currently the tolerance for No. 1 spring wheat is 0.25% of fusarium-damaged kernels by weight, increasing to 5% fusarium-damaged kernels allowed in feed wheat.
In our view, tightening the visually based standards will unfairly penalize those farmers whose wheat is infected with the less virulent strain of fusarium. If the standards are tightened, then we would propose that farmers be granted the option to have their wheat tested and graded on the basis of the actual DON level present in their wheat sample. Providing an objective test-based grading option would ensure the value that farmers receive for their wheat is based on its true intrinsic quality and not on its appearance. It would provide farmers with a clearer market signal and allow us to make better decisions in terms of our cropping decisions, variety choices, and management practices.
The growing problem of fusarium points to the need for a greater research effort in the development of varieties that better resist this fungal disease. There are some fungicides on the market that can lessen the severity of infection; however, these are not fully effective and of course come with a cost, of more than $7 per acre.
In recent years varieties with better fusarium resistance have appeared on the market, largely thanks to the breeding efforts of Agriculture Canada researchers. This work continues, and we would encourage the devotion of greater resources to this increasing problem.
Part of this research could include the application of biotechnology. Farmers have already seen the significant economic and environmental benefits of biotechnology, including reduced pesticide use, lower fuel costs, reduced soil erosion, and higher yields. We believe biotechnology has the potential to play an important role in minimizing the effects of fusarium and in enhancing food safety.
Last, the Wheat Growers would like to provide comment on proposals to implement standards for DON levels in processed cereals, including flour and other products. We understand there are currently no regulations specifying tolerances for DON. We submit that the absence of such regulations is largely due to the exceptional food safety record of the industry. Farmers, grain handlers and marketers, the Canadian Grain Commission, and the milling industry have been successful in managing and mitigating the risks associated with fusarium-infected grain. To our knowledge, there has not been a single human health incident arising from DON in Canadian flour or food products.
To provide even greater consumer protection, the Wheat Growers are not opposed to the implementation of new regulations stipulating maximum DON levels in flour and food products. However, given Canada's outstanding food safety record in this area, we do not see a need for a hasty or haphazard approach. The Wheat Growers recommend a thorough consultation process with the industry, incorporating an examination of all mycotoxin concerns before any new regulations or compliance measures are implemented. Existing Canadian Grain Commission grading standards on fusarium should remain in place until this review is concluded.
The Wheat Growers would also ask that any standards be implemented in concert with the adoption of like standards in the United States, given the extent of the cross-border trade in grain, flour, and bakery products. To impose standards in Canada that are tighter than those in the U.S. would simply place our millers, and by extension Canadian farmers, at a competitive disadvantage.
Thank you for this opportunity to share our views with the committee today.
3:50 p.m.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Larry Miller
Thank you very much.
We'll now move on to the National Farmers Union with Mr. Nigel Smith. I don't believe Mr. Tait is here today.
3:50 p.m.
Nigel Smith Youth President, National Farmers Union
No, he couldn't make it today. It's a long haul from Saskatchewan on the farm.