Agriculture Committee on Oct. 27th, 2009

[The Chair, Conservative, Larry Miller]

That's a good point. Maybe we should talk outside and clarify that issue.

Mr. Bellavance, you have seven minutes.

[André Bellavance, Bloc, Richmond—Arthabaska, QC]

Thank you.

Thank you for your testimony. First of all, thank you for coming here. You know, we will probably be producing a very lengthy report on competitiveness. Many witnesses have testified, and it is very good to see that even more testimony will be added.

[The Chair, Conservative, Larry Miller]

Just hold it, Mr. Bellavance. We need translation for Ms. Simmons.

[André Bellavance, Bloc, Richmond—Arthabaska, QC]

No problem, this was just an introduction.

[Pierre Lemieux, Conservative, Glengarry—Prescott—Russell, ON]

Each word is important, my friend.

[André Bellavance, Bloc, Richmond—Arthabaska, QC]

Mr. Lemieux said that everything that I had to say was very important.

[An hon. member]

That is true.

[André Bellavance, Bloc, Richmond—Arthabaska, QC]

Thank you, thank you very much.

[The Chair, Conservative, Larry Miller]

Mr. Bellavance, carry on.

[André Bellavance, Bloc, Richmond—Arthabaska, QC]

I was saying that we will probably be producing a lengthy report on competitiveness, with many new recommendations as well, no doubt. The reason why we will have recommendations is, of course, because of the fact that these issues have not been resolved. I do understand that we cannot resolve all of this overnight, but that means that there is a great deal of work to do, both for the government and for Parliament in general, with respect to the future of agriculture.

As Mr. Lemieux just said about my comments, all of your testimony is very important. We really appreciate your travelling here to tell us about your point of view.

Ms. Simmons and Mr. Norton, you both talked about the importance of buying locally. We know that consumers want to buy locally, however we have to ensure that there are no barriers or physical impossibilities preventing this from happening. Consumers looking at products that they really want to buy want to know whether these products come from their region. However, we have realized that, at some point, the regulations issued by the government have made it impossible to ascertain whether or not these products are local.

This leads me to my question on the labelling of products in Canada. Have some of your members experienced problems since the rules changed?

We know that the previous rules were unacceptable as well, because it was the total cost of a product that determined whether or not it could be designated as a “Product of Canada” and the bar had been set very low, at 51%. This led to some anomalies, such as the case where the jar, liquid, lid and manpower were from Canada, but the pickle itself came from India and yet the product was still labeled as “Product of Canada”.

So we changed the rule, which was necessary. However, our committee examined this issue and the consensus was that we should adopt the 85% rule for Canadian products. So if sugar or certain other ingredients are added to local products, nobody will be penalized by not being allowed to put a “Product of Canada” label on the product.

As for our 98% rule, which we have in Quebec at any case, I have heard many reports about the economic problems caused: companies have to change the packaging, the labeling and consumers do not know what to think because we are not allowed to write “Product of Canada” on a product that is in fact 87% or 90% Canadian made. We never reach the 98% mark, because as soon as you add a little bit of something else, you have a problem.

I would therefore like to know whether you have experienced this type of problem in your respective sectors, and I would like to know what you think about it.

[Greg Norton]

We don't have processing within our industry; everything is fresh. I think a lot of the problems occur when it gets into the processing part.

But we do have a problem. We have noticed this year that some Canadian buyers are importing American cherries, reboxing them in Canadian boxes, and putting them out in the market. It's not a huge problem. As far as the actual labelling, we think that Canadian stores are more likely to take fresh U.S. cherries and put a sign on them indicating they're from Canada when they're actually American. That's a problem we have noticed. But as far as the content and everything, it's not a major issue for us because everything is fresh. We have no processing of our product. Without processing, the risk or liability isn't as great as in your examples.

We've reported some of these instances of switching boxes to the CFIA. That's a regulatory agency without any enforcement--with no will, knowledge, ability, or desire to enforce. I have been involved in some cases where they've misrepresented American fruit as Canadian. That goes to my previous comments about just doing the job. Hire some people, get out there, enforce the laws of Canada, and we'll be happy.

Thank you.

[André Bellavance, Bloc, Richmond—Arthabaska, QC]

Ms. Simmons, obviously Prince Edward Island potatoes are 100% Canadian. However, there is the matter of processing, and your producers deal with processors.

[Brenda Simmons]

I haven't been made aware of any problems there. Potatoes usually are such high-percentage content, and the canola oils—the oils that are used—are also Canadian, so I'm not aware of any issues there.

As Greg said, there's definitely mislabelling in the stores. When you get to bulk potatoes, sometimes it says “Product of Canada”, when you know they're U.S. potatoes in the bag. It's the same thing even for packaged product, where they have a sign that says “Canadian Potatoes”, but it will say “Product of U.S.A.” right on the bag underneath.

So we don't have rules as they do, obviously, in the U.S. on the country-of-origin labelling. And not to switch too much, but that is an issue for us going into the States too. I know it's a big issue on the livestock side, but we have had buyers switch away from Canadian potatoes because of the separation and things they have to maintain down there too.

So sorry, no, because there's such a high percentage on french fries and so on, but I certainly am aware of it from other horticultural producers at meetings we go to across the country.

[André Bellavance, Bloc, Richmond—Arthabaska, QC]

You are raising a very important problem which means that even today, in 2009, we find that there are people who dishonestly—need we say it —misinform the consumer and obviously create unfair competition against our producers by importing products from abroad.

If the rules allow importing the product and if it is indicated that it comes from the United States, I have no problem with that. The consumer will choose. However, you said that even today, it is possible to lead people to believe that a product was made in Canada when it really comes from the United States. The rules at the borders are still being violated. How do you explain that and what solutions do you propose?

Mr. Norton, I know that you tried to change the situation. You said that you do not know all the NAFTA rules, etc., but what kind of recommendations do you think we could make with regard to this?

[Greg Norton]

Mr. Chairman, through you to the member, we're not technical legal people who understand trade agreements and the technical rules. I guess I would be urging this committee on Canadian agriculture to get to the bottom of it as well. We as an industry...the other member requested that we look into some of this for you. We can sort of do that. We can scratch the surface of it. But as to the actual realities and legally what they mean and whatnot, I think the government needs to embrace that and put it together for us. That would be one of the recommendations. Develop that understanding from your committee's level.

People within the CFIA , the actual people I've reported violators to, are very unsure of what the rule really means. Government employees have difficulty with it. There's a lot of confusion around that, so perhaps one of the recommendations could be to analyze what all the rules are and what they simply mean, so that producers, wholesalers, consumers, and, more importantly, the enforcement staff can understand what their job should be, because there seems to be, from our perspective, a real disconnect, a lot of confusion about the rule.

[The Chair, Conservative, Larry Miller]

Thank you. Your time is up, but just as a follow-up, I first have a comment to yours, Mr. Norton. Product-of-Canada labelling is pretty clear to me. There's some debate about whether it's too stringent or whatever, but that's irrelevant. It's clear.

Ms. Simmons, to your comments, I just have a question. You stated that you know where there are instances of American potatoes being labelled “Product of Canada”. That's against the law. My question is whether you or your organization, when you know that—and I'm sure you can back it up—report that to the proper authorities, and if so, what has been the response to that?

[Brenda Simmons]

I'm glad you asked me this because I do want to clarify. What I mean is not mislabelling on the packaging. I mean in the stores, when you go in and the price is there above the display. It might say “Product of Canada, $2.99 a bag”. I think in a lot of cases that's not deliberate. I think it's kids working in produce aisles and putting signs up along the way and maybe not realizing how important that is to people.

[The Chair, Conservative, Larry Miller]

Okay, so it's not on the product itself.

[Brenda Simmons]

In my case, it's not mislabelling in the legal sense.

[The Chair, Conservative, Larry Miller]

Okay, but that's a good point that I think we and the food industry or the grocery store industry need to be reminded of.

I'd just say to our analyst here that I would hope that's something in there, because it's a good point. It probably isn't deliberately done, but who knows? It's not correct.

Mr. Allen, you have seven minutes.

[Greg Norton]

Can I respond, Mr. Chairman, just quickly?

[The Chair, Conservative, Larry Miller]

If you're very, very brief.

[Greg Norton]

I have a very personal experience with this. I reported that an illegal shipment of California nectarines was being sold at a market in Calgary as “Canadian”.

[The Chair, Conservative, Larry Miller]

Was that since the new rule has come in?

[Greg Norton]

It was a year ago, the summer of 2008.

Regardless of that, I handed them the case, with photographs, names, delivery dates, and pick times. The CFIA bumbled it so badly and handled it so unprofessionally, Mr. Chairman, that I would never do it again. I just wouldn't waste my time doing that. I spent days and days on it, and they didn't do the follow-up this growing season, which they promised to do. It was a complete embarrassment to all of us as Canadians.