Evidence of meeting #41 for Agriculture and Agri-Food in the 41st Parliament, 2nd Session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was varieties.

A recording is available from Parliament.

On the agenda

MPs speaking

Also speaking

R. Edward Empringham  Senior Project Manager, Canadian Animal Health Coalition
Dave Solverson  President, Canadian Cattlemen's Association
Reg Schmidt  Special Projects Contractor, Feeder Associations of Alberta Limited
Clyde Graham  Acting President, Canadian Fertilizer Institute
Ryder Lee  Manager, Federal Provincial Relations, Canadian Cattlemen's Association
Chris Andrews  Administrator, Canadian Ornamental Horticulture Alliance
Deborah Hart  Seed Coordinator, Potato Growers of Alberta
Ashley St Hilaire  Acting Executive Director, Canadian Organic Growers
Réjean Bouchard  Assistant Director, Policy and Dairy Production, Dairy Farmers of Canada

1:05 p.m.

Acting Executive Director, Canadian Organic Growers

Ashley St Hilaire

Not really....

1:05 p.m.

Liberal

Mark Eyking Liberal Sydney—Victoria, NS

It's not spelled out.

1:05 p.m.

Acting Executive Director, Canadian Organic Growers

Ashley St Hilaire

No, it's not spelled out.

1:05 p.m.

Liberal

Mark Eyking Liberal Sydney—Victoria, NS

Thank you.

My last question is for the nursery people.

Yesterday, we had the landscaping people, and they gave almost the same presentation you gave today. They brought up the roses and the varieties and how big the industry was. I asked them if this UPOV legislation comes forward, would it help Canada be an exporter. One of our biggest customers is the United States and the landscaping people alluded to how we might be able to sell some of the varieties, whether it's rose or whatever, down in northern United States. Can you comment on that—if we could become a bigger exporter, especially with the United States, or maybe someone in northern European climes that are similar to Canada, with this new legislation?

1:05 p.m.

Administrator, Canadian Ornamental Horticulture Alliance

Chris Andrews

Yes, it would. It's amazing how associations in the same industry will give you the same presentation. Obviously, we're a united group.

Yes, I believe it would, simply because—I'll speak for Canada first—it creates more investment by the growers, so then we can get into more research. We are involved in a lot of research now.

I do believe that it will give the growers, the breeders, and the researchers more confidence to develop more of these plant materials to be able to sell internationally—for certain to the United States and to other countries throughout Europe. Yes, I do believe that.

1:05 p.m.

Conservative

The Chair Conservative Bev Shipley

Thank you very much.

Thank you, Mr. Eyking.

We'll now move to our last questioner, Mr. Lemieux, for five minutes, please

October 30th, 2014 / 1:05 p.m.

Conservative

Pierre Lemieux Conservative Glengarry—Prescott—Russell, ON

Thank you, Chair.

Thank you to our witnesses for being here today.

I'll just follow up on some comments made by Ms. St Hilaire regarding legislation and regulations. You expressed a fear that regulations could undo what's there legislatively. But that's not the way it works: legislation trumps regulation, which means that only a legislative change can undo what is in legislation. Regulations cannot do that. You should be assured that in order to do a legislative change, it has to go through the exact process we're going through right now to bring into effect a legislative change.

The second thing I think I would raise is that you have just given a fairly detailed description of what farmers could do under which conditions regarding their privilege or their rights. I would only offer the caution that sometimes when something is too prescriptive, it becomes exclusionary. When you start listing all the conditions, oh, you forgot about hail. What about drought? What about mould? What about pests? When you become too prescriptive, in fact you become exclusionary, which is not necessarily to the benefit of your members or to organic farmers.

I think the third thing I would simply mention is that I think it's good for everyone to remember that farmers have choice, so if they want to use....This bill is not retroactive. It will not apply to seed or seed technology that's registered and available on the market before the bill is passed into law.

So organic farmers will have that choice. For example, if they are going to use publicly available seed technology, they can to continue to use that into the future. They also have the choice, I would believe, of choosing new technology that is perhaps focused on the organic sector, but it's completely up to them what they would like to do.

I would think organic farmers shouldn't fear that because in the meeting yesterday I was pointing out that my read of the situation for organic farmers is that the organic sector is growing by leaps and bounds. It's a very exciting sector, and in fact by offering better protection to plant breeders....

Plant breeding is not just about GM, as you would know well, I think. There's a host of technology, research, and development that is non-GM that will benefit organic farmers, and even if that's brought to market, because of the increased protection, farmers still have the choice. An organic farmer still has the choice as to whether he is interested or she is interested in that technology or not. This bill in no way constrains them.

I'm wondering if you could perhaps comment on that last one.

1:10 p.m.

Acting Executive Director, Canadian Organic Growers

Ashley St Hilaire

Thank you.

Absolutely. We see this bill as an opportunity to create innovation, and as I mentioned, there is a limited availability of varieties for organic production right now. This bill will create opportunities and incentives for more varieties to be created.

Really, one of the issues—and I know I'm not the only organization to point this out—was that the farmers' privileges can be limited to a certain class of farmers. Who and what these classes are can change through regulation. That was my understanding.

Again, I echo the sentiments of the Canada Organic Trade Association in that we do support the intentions of this bill and think that, as long as our farmers—and not necessarily just organic farmers but all farmers—maintain these core rights around seed use, reuse, storing, and stocking, then we don't see any significant constraints to the market development of the organic sector in Canada.

1:10 p.m.

Conservative

Pierre Lemieux Conservative Glengarry—Prescott—Russell, ON

Thank you. That's good, Chair.

1:10 p.m.

Conservative

The Chair Conservative Bev Shipley

Thank you very much.

I want to thank each of the witnesses from the first and the second hours, and also our committee members for asking great, pointed questions.

As we wrap up the witness part of this bill, it is interesting to note that the bill covers those who are involved in agricultural production, and many consumers, whether of food or or what Mr. Andrews represents in terms of ornamental horticulture, particularly flowers—which my wife wants me to support in as many ways as I can. I think all of us do.

It has been thorough. There have been very pointed questions and answers, and I appreciate all of our witnesses who have shown up over the last few weeks.

Remember, folks, the amendments are to be in by 6 o'clock this evening, if anyone has them.

We will back here at 11 o'clock on Tuesday morning until 1. We have booked room number 237 in Centre Block. That will run from 3:30 until 5:30, but it is booked until midnight so we can go through each of the clauses.

Thank you very much.

This meeting is adjourned.