Agriculture Committee on Feb. 24th, 2015

[Dan Paszkowski]

Honestly, I'm not that familiar with chapter 17 or the dispute settlement mechanism of that agreement. I'm sorry.

[Ruth Ellen Brosseau, NDP, Berthier—Maskinongé, QC]

Thank you.

[The Chair, Conservative, Bev Shipley]

You did well. Thank you, Madam Brosseau.

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

[Larry Maguire, Conservative, Brandon—Souris, MB]

Patty, I'd like to ask some questions on the provincial jurisdictions that are moving forward, you said without the science-based..... We like to make sure that everything is science-based. I know that in my previous life in farming and farm leadership, that was a mainstay, and certainly from a political perspective it was as well.

Can you give us some examples of the various types? I know that you've looked at the variety of registrations, the 46 that are registered only in the west, and a number of others. Can you give us some examples of classes of grains that might be in jeopardy in regard to being able to be traded or that are being used right now with non-science-based backgrounds?

[Patty Townsend]

That's kind of a hard question, because there's so much restriction on the ability to sell seed—I used wheat as an example across Canada—it's hard to estimate what the impact might be. We represent the private sector, and I know that when a company develops a variety, they generally have a market in mind. But in a lot of cases now, if they're developing fusarium-resistant varieties, it could be something that would be beneficial to Atlantic Canada, or to Ontario and Quebec. If those recommending committees suggest that perhaps it's not good enough, or that they don't want to let it in for whatever their merit classifications are—they're all different—then they can't sell in those provinces, which means those farmers don't have access to them.

One of the ways it could be fixed, and I think it's a fairly easy fix, is that once the government proposal for changes to variety registration comes through, you could actually put some crop kinds into the new basic registration system, which wouldn't require the recommendation of a committee. That way the marketplace would determine whether or not those varieties were suitable for those areas. No farmer will buy a variety that they know is susceptible to fusarium or to anything else for that matter that would jeopardize their markets.

[Larry Maguire, Conservative, Brandon—Souris, MB]

Just as a follow-up, do you look at seed treatment varieties as well and that sort of thing from a licensing perspective? Is there anything that you feel needs to be done on that side of it as well, or is it strictly the seed that you're—

[Patty Townsend]

No, we have a partnership with CropLife Canada, and they do most of the seed treatment work. If it's not treated seed, it generally falls into the bailiwick of CropLife.

[Larry Maguire, Conservative, Brandon—Souris, MB]

As well, do you deal at all with forage and lawn seeds—

[Patty Townsend]

Yes.

[Larry Maguire, Conservative, Brandon—Souris, MB]

—in regard to these areas when you're talking about the lack of science-based material and that sort of thing for decision-making?

Perhaps you could expand on that a bit.

[Patty Townsend]

Forage and lawn seeds are a little bit different. Forage in particular is actually an area where national registration is working quite well. The reason it is working well is that there haven't been the resources to have recommending committees in some areas. If it's registered in a province where there is an active recommending committee, then it's available nationally simply because there isn't a recommendation committee in other areas to change it.

[Larry Maguire, Conservative, Brandon—Souris, MB]

Thank you.

Those are the only questions I have.

[The Chair, Conservative, Bev Shipley]

We'll move on to Madam Raynault, please, for five minutes.

[Francine Raynault, NDP, Joliette, QC]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Thank you for being with us here today. We have already met, because you testified before this committee.

My colleague spoke of a winery in her riding ofBerthier—Maskinongé. She is right to say that it is a magnificent place that one must visit. This vineyard can sell its wines internationally. Unfortunately, we cannot name it here, but you will ask her where it is located.

[Ruth Ellen Brosseau, NDP, Berthier—Maskinongé, QC]

It's in Lanoraie.

[Francine Raynault, NDP, Joliette, QC]

That's it.

There is something that I am having a hard time understanding. Interprovincial trade in wine and spirits is difficult because some provinces are throwing up what I would call roadblocks. For example, New Brunswick allows the import of one bottle of wine and Newfoundland and Labrador, a bottle of 1.4 litres. That's almost nothing.

Why can't we find a way to agree and allow people to buy wine from another province and have it delivered to them? Why is that still so difficult? Wineries generate 31,000 jobs and attract 3 million visitors. If more wineries could sell their products outside of their own province, they could create even more jobs and attract more visitors. Why is it still so difficult, despite certain advances in internal trade?

[Dan Paszkowski]

In two words: liquor boards. When you have a monopoly system, the fear is that if you open up that door just a little bit, it's going to blow open and there's going to be a reduction and a displacement of sales, a reduction in revenue, and it will be more difficult for liquor boards to meet the dividend demands of their governments of the day. They're advising their political masters that it would be difficult for wineries if direct consumer delivery opened; they'd have more competition. I would argue that we have a lot of great wines in this country coming in from foreign nations. We're doing very well competing with them. But that really is the major obstacle, the liquor boards and their ability to convince their political masters that this is something that the government should not do. Extend that to beer and spirits, and then there's greater loss in revenue.

As we look at it, if that wine is currently not available for sale in the liquor board—and as you can see from the market share that we have, most of our wines are not available in most liquor boards—give Canadian consumers a chance to try them. The consumers we're seeking are the ones buying wines from around the world anyway. They are going to increase consumption at their liquor boards; they're not going to stop going there. Liquor boards are going to get research, full knowledge, as to the types of wines that are coming into their jurisdictions from different wine producing provinces, and with that, they can reduce their risk in terms of their listings. No liquor board wants to list a Canadian wine, or any wine, that's going to sit on a shelf and collect dust. This provides them with the information they need to make the right decisions for wines that are going to sell fast.

We believe it's going to support liquor boards, but the difficulty we have is that most liquor boards don't want to give this the opportunity because there's a risk of loss of revenue, which we believe would be minimal. There would be growth, but it would be minimal.

[Francine Raynault, NDP, Joliette, QC]

It is a pity. In fact, it is hard for small vendors to sell their products in government liquor stores, and if they do have a place on the shelves, it is close to the door, almost outside, or in a basket somewhere.

In my opinion, this would be profitable for everyone. Liquor control boards collect taxes; we all know it and won't hide it. Provinces need this money. However, there is certainly a way to come to an agreement and allow these products to make their way into every province so that we are free to buy them. I am sure that this would be advantageous for internal trade. And yet, there seem to be almost insurmountable barriers, and that's a pity, in my opinion.

[The Chair, Conservative, Bev Shipley]

I don't know, and I think you just stated their position.

[Francine Raynault, NDP, Joliette, QC]

It's already over!

[The Chair, Conservative, Bev Shipley]

Very well.

I'm going to go to Mr. Zimmer, for five minutes, please.

[Bob Zimmer, Conservative, Prince George—Peace River, BC]

Thank you for appearing before committee today. It's good to see you guys again. I appreciate what the wine industry goes through. We saw Dan Albas working hard to get his bill done, assuming that it would be the end of a lot of these issues, but apparently that's not the case. Who would have thought we would need a minister for internal trade in Canada? We have one for foreign markets; Ed is very busy across the globe getting those markets open. Who'd think that we'd need to do that internally?

I want to talk to some of the points you've made. You've made three points that you want us to possibly help with. I just want you to inform us about what stage these are at, and if anything has been started.

You recommend to enhance federal engagement with provincial governments to remove interprovincial barriers to wine trade. Certainly we've been doing that. Are you aware if it's been a process where we're going down this road, or is this all from the start?

[Dan Paszkowski]

There has been some progress made on the first one, and that's been through the premiers' conference that takes place every year, in particular through the good work of the Premier of British Columbia. She has been pushing very hard to get her provincial colleagues to open up their markets. Some progress was made in terms of pulling together an intergovernmental group from British Columbia, Alberta, and Saskatchewan to talk about ways to put in place a legislative proposal to make this happen. For whatever reason, that apparently has started to crumble.

I think there is the opportunity at the highest levels to get premiers engaged before the next time they meet, or to have individual members of Parliament talk to their provincial colleagues on the importance of wine as a pilot study, if you will, a low-hanging fruit to support interprovincial trade. It's at the political level that we need some push to make this happen, because that's the place where it's going to happen.

[Bob Zimmer, Conservative, Prince George—Peace River, BC]

You were at our western Canadian stakeholders meetings in Vancouver at which we were trying to increase awareness of these kinds of issues. I guess you're preaching to the choir with us though. We need to invite some of our provincial counterparts to those meetings and not just have an internal discussion. It's troubling to see that you've struggled so much with this. Maybe we'll have to talk to the Prime Minister about creating a position called the minister for internal trade for Canada. That's something we can definitely work on.

Again, most of us understand what the issues are, and we'll continue to work on them on your behalf. Thank you for doing what you're doing for Canadian vintners. We appreciate the hard work you guys do behind the scenes. Thank you.

[The Chair, Conservative, Bev Shipley]

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