Evidence of meeting #59 for Agriculture and Agri-Food in the 41st Parliament, 1st Session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was japan.
A recording is available from Parliament.
9:35 a.m.
Greg Meredith Assistant Deputy Minister, Strategic Policy Branch, Department of Agriculture and Agri-Food
Yes, Mr. Chair. I hope I get the titles correct.
First we have Barbara Jordan, vice-president of operations with CFIA. Is that correct, Barbara?
9:35 a.m.
Barbara Jordan Associate Vice-President, Operations, Canadian Food Inspection Agency
It's a slight promotion, Greg. I'm the associate vice-president of operations at the Food Inspection Agency.
9:35 a.m.
Assistant Deputy Minister, Strategic Policy Branch, Department of Agriculture and Agri-Food
Okay. Well, forgive me for trying.
As well, we have Peter Everson, chief financial officer of CFIA; Rita Moritz, the assistant deputy minister for farm financial programs; and Pierre Corriveau, our chief financial officer.
9:35 a.m.
Conservative
9:35 a.m.
NDP
Alex Atamanenko NDP British Columbia Southern Interior, BC
Thank you all for being here.
I have five questions. I'll just throw them at you, and if we don't have time to answer them in the five minutes, perhaps I could get a written response at your convenience.
First, some farmers in my area are concerned about the potential of market harm with the GMO Arctic apple. I've written to the minister about that. What will the department do respecting the Union of B.C. Municipalities' motion asking to put a stop to the release of this apple into the environment, with its potential harm to our fruit growers, both organic and non-organic?
The second question concerns GMO alfalfa. What will the government's response be should Monsanto decide to proceed with registration of GMO alfalfa varieties, in light of the fact that there doesn't seem to be a need for it by farmers?
The third one concerns the somewhat controversial two-year rat study by Séralini in France that found significant evidence of harm after a diet of GM corn. I know that our government is looking into that. I'm not sure if it's Health Canada or CFIA. What is the status of the investigation of that particular study?
My fourth question is this: can the CFIA provide the committee with a report breaking down the money spent to inspect the operation and infrastructure at horse slaughter plants as well as border inspection systems and operations required to monitor the transport of U.S. horses into Canada for the purposes of horse slaughter for human consumption? In other words, what funding has been allocated? Can we see what funding has been allocated to this inspection?
The last question is about a comment the minister made in regard to CETA. There's some concern by farmers that UPOV 91 may be adopted, which cranks this up a bit more, with a potential loss of seed control to farmers.
Those are my questions. I would appreciate some answers, either now or later.
Thank you.
9:35 a.m.
Associate Vice-President, Policy and Programs, Canadian Food Inspection Agency
Thank you very much.
I'll address the questions regarding the various genetically modified products.
As the committee knows, no genetically modified products can be placed on the market until a series of food safety assessments are conducted on the part of Health Canada, an assessment of the implications for the environment is done by the Canadian Food Inspection Agency, and an assessment related to the safety of the products for animal feed is also conducted by the Canadian Food Inspection Agency. In addition to those assessments, for certain products there are, of course, a variety of registration requirements.
Take GM alfalfa as an example. There is no permitted GM alfalfa in Canada. There has been no application for the registration of a variety of GM alfalfa in Canada. At this time, GM alfalfa is not present in production in Canada, and therefore concerns related to GM alfalfa at this point are moot.
In terms of the issue of a GM apple, of course the same oversight responsibilities would apply, as I have mentioned. Of course, in addition to all of these, the commercial uptake of any product, even after it is permitted, then depends on the choice of the industry as to whether or not those products would actually enter the marketplace. There are a number of checks that provide assurance that products derived through genetic modification will be safe for consumption and that those products, if introduced into the Canadian environment, will not present problems in the Canadian environment once introduced.
9:40 a.m.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Merv Tweed
Thank you. What I will do is just ask that any other responses that Mr. Atamanenko has asked for come through the Chair.
Mr. Zimmer is next.
9:40 a.m.
Conservative
9:40 a.m.
Conservative
LaVar Payne Conservative Medicine Hat, AB
Thank you, Chair.
Thank you to the officials for coming today.
Some interesting things have happened over the last year in terms of the Canadian Wheat Board. Now it is an entity in transition and is being supported by our government with $184 million. I asked that question of the minister, and he did talk quite a bit about it. I am really pleased with what appears to be happening with the Canadian Wheat Board and the opportunities that are available for it.
Can you outline how this marketing freedom has affected the grain industry in western Canada up to this point?
9:40 a.m.
Assistant Deputy Minister, Strategic Policy Branch, Department of Agriculture and Agri-Food
Thank you for the question.
The minister was quite accurate in saying that there is a great deal of excitement in the industry right now. In the last two weeks, a number of grain organizations have met. There is tremendous enthusiasm in the market, especially for the non-board grains. Prices are very high. Companies and shippers stepped in and quickly picked up the slack where the CWB had been.
We have talked to the railways, who are telling us that their velocity—the speed with which they turn around cars—is up because there is greater transparency from the in-country terminal rate to the port terminal. The volumes going through Thunder Bay are up 19% over the five-year average and 15% over the last year. Churchill continues to be used. In particular, the minister mentioned the diversification of shippers that are using Churchill. There were three of them this year, with another two expressing a high degree of interest. Overall, I would say that the combination of a freer market, good prices, and good crop yields have been a real boon to western grain farmers.
9:40 a.m.
Conservative
LaVar Payne Conservative Medicine Hat, AB
I would agree. I have talked to a number of farmers in my riding. They are all smiling because of the great prices they are getting and the opportunity they have to market their own grain. That has been extremely positive.
I have another question for you in terms of the supplementary estimates (B) for the CFIA. It includes a transfer from National Defence of $276,000 for the Canadian safety and security program. I am wondering if you could explain to the committee exactly what that money is and how it will be used under CFIA.
9:45 a.m.
Peter Everson Vice-President, Corporate Management, Canadian Food Inspection Agency
The $276,000 comes from a program run by National Defence. The intent of the program is to strengthen the infrastructure of governmental and non-governmental partners in science, according to National Defence's priorities. In particular, we've taken this money and we're purchasing high-speed scientific equipment to allow for the rapid characterization of food pathogens in our microbiology laboratories across Canada. This will allow for faster results in the event of a food emergency and will support other types of emergencies in Canada.
9:45 a.m.
Conservative
LaVar Payne Conservative Medicine Hat, AB
I noticed that overall, net income for farmers is up. I don't know if you have any other statistics available. The minister talked about that briefly. He indicated it was up some 50% from the year before. Do you have any other history to show why that has occurred, and in what areas it was in? Was it just in canola or wheat? Do we have anything to tell us if it was cattle or hogs?
9:45 a.m.
Assistant Deputy Minister, Strategic Policy Branch, Department of Agriculture and Agri-Food
I can go through a number of different measures of performance this year.
As the minister said, income is up over 50% since last year. Farm cash receipts are up 12%, and that's more or less across the board. It includes grains, oilseeds, and other crops.
Cattle prices were up by almost 20% in 2011. Hog receipts were up by 16%. It's true, though, that they are having a difficult time this year with higher feed prices, but overall, prices are much higher than the five-year average.
Almost across the board, you're seeing the sector doing extremely well. Despite increases in input costs, the returns to farmers are up as well. Overall, the industry is doing very well.
9:45 a.m.
Liberal
Frank Valeriote Liberal Guelph, ON
I'm looking at page 34, vote 10. I see $10,862,000 being cut under spending authorities available within the vote. You're familiar with that number, are you? I suppose somebody is.
How much of those cuts are back office cuts, and in what amount? How much of those cuts are related to food safety program cuts?
9:45 a.m.
Pierre Corriveau Assistant Deputy Minister, Corporate Management, Department of Agriculture and Agri-Food
Thank you, Mr. Chair.
On food safety, there is absolutely no reduction throughout the entire DRAP program for the department. On the $10 million, we could provide the clerk with the details behind it. Most of this has to do with lapses in grants and contributions for the current year.
9:45 a.m.
Assistant Deputy Minister, Corporate Management, Department of Agriculture and Agri-Food
We could provide the details to the clerk, but I assure you there is absolutely no reduction in food safety.
9:45 a.m.
Liberal
Frank Valeriote Liberal Guelph, ON
Previously, Mr. Da Pont was answering some questions about the $56.1 million for cuts to food safety. He made reference to $24 million being trimmed to reduce EX positions and IM/IT positions, neither of which I'm familiar with. Can anyone explain that to me, and what impact it has on food safety inspection?
9:45 a.m.
Vice-President, Corporate Management, Canadian Food Inspection Agency
I'll expand some on the president's comments.
The reduction of $24.3 million is an administrative reduction. It includes a large variety of activities, ranging from very small to some quite a bit larger. There's been a general reduction in EX positions—
