Agriculture Committee on April 28th, 2014

[Andrea Brocklebank]

Yes, absolutely.

And the self-pollinating versus cross-pollinating crops—

[Randy Hoback, Conservative, Prince Albert, SK]

And of course we've taken the handcuffs off wheat, so wheat is getting a lot of investment in research and development.

[Andrea Brocklebank]

Yes.

I think it's also important to point out that we've worked with the other clusters and are trying to coordinate across clusters as well.

[Randy Hoback, Conservative, Prince Albert, SK]

How do you interact with VIDO in the University of Saskatchewan? How does that get into your cluster picture? Again, that's a lot of science and technology, not just in the livestock sector and I'd say the cattle sector, but right across the animal sector as well.

[Andrea Brocklebank]

We have ongoing relationships with them. We're doing a lot of work around vaccine development, TB. Work is under way, and that was actually funded under the CAAP program, not under the cluster. Again, it's a very important part of our animal health and welfare portfolio, and the long-term vaccine development—

[Randy Hoback, Conservative, Prince Albert, SK]

The infrastructure came under a different program, but as a very key part of Canadian infrastructure—

[Andrea Brocklebank]

Absolutely.

[Randy Hoback, Conservative, Prince Albert, SK]

Thank you.

[The Chair, Conservative, Bev Shipley]

Thank you very much, Mr. Hoback.

We'll now go to Mr. Eyking, for five minutes, please.

[Mark Eyking, Liberal, Sydney—Victoria, NS]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

And I thank the witnesses for coming.

What we've been hearing quite a few times, as we've embarked on this study, is that there's a shortage of long-term vision and long-term planning and strategizing for our industries to grow and prosper in technology and innovation. You see, not just with agriculture but any industries that have done well in the world, that government has played a key role. When you see in Israel all the technology that they're coming out with, or Germany, or wherever, and that it starts in schools or at very young ages and that it goes all the way through, you understand that this environment has to be there.

It's very disturbing to see that we spend a lot of time and have our brightest and best leaving us to go to other countries where they see that their skills can be used. They probably see that there is some commitment there. That said, if we as government at present are funding innovation and technology in an ad hoc way without really working with the industries and looking at the bigger picture, we'll keep falling behind.

Let's compare some of these other countries. What are they doing better than we are to foster better scientists, better research, better synergy between all stakeholders? How can we change what we're doing here? Is it that we should be working better with the provinces and other stakeholders within the government circles?

I'll start off with you, Mr. Hall.

[Michael Hall]

That's a tough question, due to the fact that it's hard to speak to what is being done in another country. I think in your opening comments you hit on part of it, and that's the long-term stability for the researcher. They see that commitment and know that they're wanted, that they need to be there, and that they're not fighting to have a position, but are sought after and that there's a long-term plan in place. I think that's got to be very attractive for someone in the research profession. It's that commitment to basic level research that's really moved things ahead. It's hard for industry to fund, and it's hard for other co-funders to be involved in some of that base research. That's where that partnership with the government is so important to move some of those items ahead. I'm not too sure we're there anymore.

As we get back to that long-term strategy.... And it may happening like what the other countries are doing, with their eyes open, and our seeing what's happening a little more clearly that we can try to match up and exceed....

[Andrea Brocklebank]

The beef industry understood that they had some work to do and, frankly, the clusters helped their becoming more coordinated by having that consistent strategy. But now it's also about getting not only participation beyond.... The cluster is part of it, but so are other AgCanada programming, other Government of Canada programming, and also our provincial research programming.

I remember talking to one researcher about the fact that he had a really strong program and he had adequate funding, but it was coming from 15 to 20 different funding sources, each of which has an annual report and a final report. Researchers become inundated by that administration, and they are not allowed to do their research to the greatest effectiveness.

That's where we've tried to work as an industry, so we'll say to another funder, “If you're going to play in that arena, we'll focus here”, knowing that as long as the work is being done, that's the objective. We're trying to give our researchers a bit more time to do research and not to have to grapple with finding adequate funding for their programming. So we're trying to be more strategic with our allocations.

I think there's some continued work to be done in terms of the federal-provincial arrangements, because each province has its own research funding and possibly several pots of it. That's one of the challenges. Adequate funding is part of it, but so are the consistency and number of funders that you have to access.

[Mark Eyking, Liberal, Sydney—Victoria, NS]

I recently returned from Taiwan, and they announced that they were going to buy Canadian beef. One of the things they mentioned to me was that they sent a delegation over, and they were not only very surprised but also very glad to see what we are doing in Canada.

The beef industry has been down a hard road here in the last 10 to 15 years. We know all the things that have happened, and there's been a lot of finger pointing, whether about inspectors or otherwise, but the reality is we got through it and we're in a great position right now to capitalize on that.

How can we get that message out there to our buyers, to our customers around the world, that we are moving ahead and we're using the right technologies and innovation to have the best and safest beef in the world market?

[Andrea Brocklebank]

I think it goes back to communicating the science an, of course, to using science as that base, and to having credible people within industry but also outside of industry to bring that science and those people forward when we're going to have those discussions.

At the end of the day, it's also about having relationships so that if they have a question, they'll come back to those people, instead of speculating or going to people who aren't using science. It's about always having that credible, fact-based approach. That's really the approach our industry has taken.

[The Chair, Conservative, Bev Shipley]

Thank you very much. Your time is up.

I'm going to go now to Mr. Dreeshen, but just before we do, we've lost Mr. Hall. So could you maybe direct your first questions to Andrea? That would be great, and hopefully we'll get him back in a few seconds.

Thank you very much.

Mr. Dreeshen, go ahead for five minutes, please.

[Earl Dreeshen, Conservative, Red Deer, AB]

Thank you very much, Mr. Chair.

I will go into some of the discussion and the things we've talked about.

A few moments ago, Mr. Hoback talked about the difference as far as being able to get researchers into certain areas goes. As he was suggesting, in the grain sector, where it looks as though there are many different opportunities, for various reasons, for the products we're looking at, I think that's an issue. Of course, if you're looking at being able to bring industry in, you can bring in these researchers we were talking about. I see the dilemma we're in under the circumstances there.

One of the other things that were discussed was how wheat research is able to move forward, but in one of your answers earlier, you spoke about a concern or an issue with feed barley and the profiles that were expected from there. You said one of the issues was with farm saved seed. I'm just wondering if you could expand on where you were going with that, so that we can see how we can maybe fit this into some of our discussions.

[Andrea Brocklebank]

I apologize for using that term, but basically it's the difference between non-hybrid and hybrid crops. Barley is a self-pollinating crop, so it's very difficult for a private company to capitalize and to have you come back to purchase seed every time.

In essence, when you have opportunities, through corn and those types of things, to invest in research, the private companies are more likely going to go with that. There is an increase in opportunities, I think, but the biggest thing we've seen over the last 20 years are breeding programs through the provincial and federal governments. There have been declines in capacity and transitions in capacity. I will emphasize that, because there's a large number of researchers who are retiring or about to retire. The point we made was that great efficiencies can be gained by ensuring that you're training people underneath those people, which is one of the things we're trying to do under the clusters, to ensure that we're transferring that knowledge before it's gone.

[Earl Dreeshen, Conservative, Red Deer, AB]

I guess one of the other things, too, when we were speaking earlier...and I believe Michael was talking about it as well. I certainly lived through this as well with BSE and so on, and of course with the SRMs. There are the concerns that we have here, if we have one market in Canada, and the issues that are related to what we have in our neighbours to the south. A lot of this has been blown out of proportion.

Of course the Canadian agriculture industry and the beef producers have had to suffer with this for a long, long time. It was a case of someone taking an issue, which of course was significant, and looking at all the potential negatives they could find from it to, in my opinion, make a good news story. Unfortunately, it devastated the industry.

I know that Michael talked about this and about the health protocols in emerging markets and expanding in that particular area, and also about some of the concerns we have with high-risk markets and how they are becoming the norm. Do you have something you could comment on in that regard?

I see that Michael is back again, but perhaps you could just comment on that and then Michael could address my question on health protocols with emerging markets.

Andrea, perhaps you wouldn't mind going first.

[Andrea Brocklebank]

I think to speak a bit broadly about it, the biggest thing we need to be able to do when negotiating trade is to have science to back it. That's often around animal health and food safety, but there's even the code of practice around animal welfare and the increasing attention being paid to that.

One of the big things we've seen with antimicrobial resistance in animal transport particularly, but animal care broadly, is that we have to be able to explain what we're doing confidently, which involves research, and then identify areas where we need to improve and move forward. If we don't have that baseline, benchmark research that we're constantly monitoring, basically that's when we run into the questions. To start doing that reactively takes years, obviously.

To some extent, that's what instills confidence in the Canadian beef industry: when you can provide that factual data up front and have the people to talk to about it.

[Earl Dreeshen, Conservative, Red Deer, AB]

With that thought in mind, of course we do have company businesses that have certain marketing strategies that somehow reflect some of the non-science bases that are there, which is unfortunate.

Michael, I wonder if you could expand somewhat on your thoughts with regard to the health protocols in emerging markets, something that you'd spoken of earlier.

[Michael Hall]

Right. It goes right back to the heart of the matter, which is the lack of a science-based approach from the emerging markets and their own interpretation of OIE regulations and guidelines and lack of understanding of what some of the issues are—the way the diseases work, and the testing, their prevalence, and the scope of our country.

It really comes back to the lack of a science-based approach. I know that the OIE has their regulations and guidelines, but they are just that, guidelines, and countries can take it to the next level.

[The Chair, Conservative, Bev Shipley]

Thank you very much.

Thank you, Mr. Dreeshen.

Now we'll go to Mr. Blanchette for five minutes, please.

[Denis Blanchette, NDP, Louis-Hébert, QC]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

I thank our witnesses for their presence here with us. What I have heard today is very interesting.

There seems to be a common thread in your respective statements. What I mean by that is that one gets the impression that up till now there has always been research and patchwork programs, and that we are always lagging behind reality somewhat, so that we are having trouble keeping up the enviable reputation we used to have within the international community.

Do you think we should be changing the way we do things, and creating a type of agile research and development ecosystem that could sustain your various fields of activity? This could be supported by public and private research in certain cases—it seems difficult to obtain the support of the private sector in certain areas of activity—which could also integrate all of the university and educational sector.

I would like to have all of your comments on that. Ms. Brocklebank, please, you could begin.

[Andrea Brocklebank]

Thank you.

To start, I guess sometimes it does sound like we're behind in what we needed, but I want to emphasize that we've made significant gains over the last 30 years, and continue. We've seen in the beef industry a 14% reduction in water use, a 34% reduction in land use, and the list goes on in terms of what we've been able to accomplish. We are changing.

[Denis Blanchette, NDP, Louis-Hébert, QC]

I wasn't criticizing industry; I'm just talking about how we do things.