Agriculture Committee on Oct. 26th, 2023

[The Chair, Liberal, Kody Blois]

I apologize. I thought you had finished.

Yes, there's still a minute and a half, so go ahead. I'm sorry, Ms. Kavanagh.

[Lynn Kavanagh, Campaign Manager, World Animal Protection]

Okay, great. Thank you so much.

Thank you, Mr. Chair and committee members, for the invitation to speak today.

I’m the farming campaign manager at World Animal Protection. We're an international animal welfare charity. We work collaboratively with stakeholders to improve farm animal welfare, and we are also a member of the National Farm Animal Care Council.

We're here today to talk about the requirements as they relate to the transport of live animals and their welfare during transport. As Ms. Cartwright said, transport is, no doubt, one of the most stressful periods experienced by farm animals during their lifetime.

While we agree with the industry concerns about ensuring that animal welfare is not compromised by a strict adherence to the rules and would support exceptions for certain reasons, such as an unexpected delay due to weather, we are also concerned that flexibility in the requirements will be used as an excuse to extend already lengthy journey times rather than address a system that is broken and in need of repair.

What I mean by that is the centralized slaughter system in Canada—which is controlled by two companies, JBS and Cargill—means that there are limited local slaughter facilities, necessitating lengthy journeys for animals, animals being sold through auctions, and long lineups at slaughter plants. In Canada, it is common for animals to be shipped across the country or to the U.S. for slaughter. The lack of local slaughter options has been identified as a problem by small-scale farmers in several provinces.

World Animal Protection’s recent report highlighting the poor treatment of fragile dairy cows, which was based on CFIA inspection reports and research from the University of Guelph and UBC, shows that cows may be in the system for several days before reaching their destinations. On average, it's three and a half days but sometimes as long as seven to 10 days. Obviously, they will deteriorate substantially along the way. In addition, limited inspections mean that the minimum standards under the health of animals regulations are not always met or enforced.

The examples of long lines at slaughter plants or having to load large numbers of animals at auctions are not appropriate exceptions to the maximum transport times. These issues are sometimes predictable and systemic in nature, and they must be addressed as such. Extending journey times for day-to-day situations should not qualify as animal welfare emergencies, as Canada already has some of the longest allowable transport times in the world.

Thank you.

[The Chair, Liberal, Kody Blois]

Ms. Kavanagh, thank you very much.

I do want to just clarify, for the record, that the conversation today is certainly not about extending the health of animal...length times. This is about electronic logging devices, the transport regulations and making sure animal health is protected. For those who are watching at home, there's no suggestion from this committee, nor are we studying anything about extending those times.

Mr. Barlow, it's over to you for six minutes.

[John Barlow, Conservative, Foothills, AB]

Thanks very much, Chair.

I appreciate your clarifying the goal of the study that we're undertaking.

Ms. Fitzgerald, we did ask this question in the previous panel, but I know, certainly with your expertise on this.... One of the comments we're getting from Transport Canada officials is that those who are moving animals should just plan their route better. I went up to a barn facility in Thunder Bay earlier this summer. Highway 1 in northern Ontario is single-lane. There are no shoulders. I don't know if there are any other options in northern Ontario when it comes to planning the route.

Can you give us an idea of the logistics and how much planning goes into coming up with those routes? I don't think this is something that is done lightly when it comes to planning the transportation of livestock.

[Susan Fitzgerald]

Certainly. Thank you for the question.

For sure. The situations we're talking about are not due to bad planning. The transporters have laid out their route and scheduled the times. What we're talking about are unforseen situations. These situations, as I mentioned, could be adverse weather, traffic accidents, bridge outages. However, you raise a very good point. There may not be, in some locations, an alternate route that's readily available to them—again, taking into consideration an alternate route that would be appropriate for the transporters to take.

As we also mentioned, if they run into a situation...because we are talking about the driver's hours of service. If a driver is going over their hours of service, a location that's appropriate for unloading those animals and making sure they have feed, water and rest may simply not be available or not be in the best interest of the animals being transported.

[John Barlow, Conservative, Foothills, AB]

Certainly, if you look at some of the conditions in northern Ontario, for example.... As I mentioned, there are no other alternatives to pulling over on the side of the highway, unloading and loading animals. I'm assuming it would be extremely hazardous, not only for the animals themselves but also for the driver, to be pulling over on the side of the highway and trying to handle a load of hogs or cattle in a winter storm.

[Susan Fitzgerald]

That's absolutely correct.

My colleague, Mr. Shantz, who is joining me here this morning as well, perhaps has something to add to that, but, as was identified, both with the panellists here now and previously, loading and unloading animals is a stressful situation for them, so we want to get them to their planned destination as quickly and safely as possible.

As the chair identified, we're not talking about changing the allotted hours for time off feed, water and rest for animals. We're talking about the drivers reaching their maximum hours of service.

[John Barlow, Conservative, Foothills, AB]

That's a great segue to my next question, Ms. Fitzgerald.

As Ms. Noble said earlier with respect to cattle feeders, there's some missing data in Canada, which is making it difficult for Transport Canada to understand the situation we're dealing with.

How often do these extenuating or emergency situations occur? I'm under the impression that drivers are doing everything they possibly can to get their animals to the destination safely. I'm assuming these are extenuating circumstances we're talking about. Is that correct?

[Susan Fitzgerald]

That's correct.

It's not like it's a frequent occurrence, but it does occur, and we want to ensure that the drivers feel comfortable. As I said, we don't want to put them in the difficult position of having to choose between complying with their hours of service by going off duty and safeguarding the care of the animals they're transporting.

Transport Canada has asked us, “Well, how many loads is this going to impact? By how much are they going to go over their hours of service? Where is it going to happen? When is it going to happen?” Well, we're talking about unforseen situations, so we don't have data to back that up. We have given them examples and shared with them situation where it happened, but that's not data. Those are examples that are given to them.

They also wanted to know if we could map out the routes in Canada where animals are being transported. Well, we have agriculture right across this country, on major routes as well as county roads. It's not like there's just one or two primary routes where animals are being transported.

[John Barlow, Conservative, Foothills, AB]

Thanks, Ms. Fitzgerald.

I have just one minute left, and I want to ask Ms. Kavanagh about her testimony here today.

Your group has a history of making some claims that have been debunked. For example, during the campaign, your group made unfounded claims that livestock was the source of the pandemic, a claim that resulted in an open letter by more than 50 animal experts around the world, including the president of the World Veterinary Association, the president of the British Veterinary Association, and the director of the Center for Food Animal Wellbeing at the University of Arkansas. Then, most recently, you attempted to inflate the numbers of the emissions from agriculture in Canada, which was also debunked by Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada.

We know the goal of your association is to end animal agriculture. From our perspective, how is this committee supposed to believe any of the evidence you're providing today when the history of your association has been to make claims that have been widely debunked by experts around the world and here in Canada?

[Lynn Kavanagh]

Oh, that's a heavy one.

First off, I'll clarify that our goal is not to end animal agriculture. We are very clear in our campaigns that we do promote less meat and dairy consumption for climate, more sustainable food production and biodiversity protection, but we do not advocate a vegan diet. That's number one. We're part of NSAC, and we work with industry to develop codes of practice and have worked with industry on other aspects.

Second, on the pandemic point, this could be a very lengthy conversation, but there is extensive data showing that industrial farming systems are very much a pandemic risk for emergent new viruses. Data from international reports, from the UN, from Chatham House, etc., have come out to show this. I would be happy to share those links with anybody who is interested.

Third, on the emissions, I'm not exactly sure what you were referring to when you said that I talked about emissions in Canada related to agriculture, but I think it's fair to say that there is global evidence. We are not alone in this point. We are simply echoing and supporting what the huge body of evidence is saying about emissions from animal agriculture and the need to reduce the amount of animal agriculture that is produced in Canada and globally to help meet our climate target.

Again—

[The Chair, Liberal, Kody Blois]

Thank you, Ms. Kavanagh.

I gave a little bit of extra time. Mr. Barlow did ask quite a pointed question, and I wanted to give you time to respond, but we are a couple of minutes over.

[Lynn Kavanagh]

Okay, I think that was enough.

[The Chair, Liberal, Kody Blois]

I'm going to turn to Mr. Louis now for six minutes.

[Tim Louis, Liberal, Kitchener—Conestoga, ON]

Thank you, Chair.

I want to thank all the witnesses for being here virtually and in person. It means a lot to us.

We all want to make sure that our drivers are safe. We want to make sure that other vehicles on the road are safe, and we want to make sure that the animals are safe. I think there is consensus here.

We're looking at what's been described as some “rigid” legislation that has some subjectivity in it. We've heard that section 76 of the regulations says that requirements do not apply to drivers during an emergency. From what I'm hearing and from what we're hearing as testimony, we're looking for clarification so that the people who are doing the enforcement are not in that subjective position to decide. No regulatory changes are being suggested right now. We're just looking for meaningful, realistic and timely solutions, considering animal welfare as it concerns an emergency.

Maybe I'll start with Mr. Schwindt from the Canadian Pork Council. I appreciate your sticking around for the second panel as well.

In our region, we have Sofina Foods and Conestoga Meats close, but a number of truck transports of Ontario hogs have gone to Quebec in the past. With Olymel's closure, that's changed the face of the industry.

How has that affected the distances that drivers are facing?

[Eric Schwindt]

Thank you for that.

Definitely, we are moving some of our hogs further distances. Brandon would be the example I'm going to use today.

That necessitates better scheduling and coordination on behalf of the industry. I think we're doing a good job of scheduling our trucks to stop in Thunder Bay at an appropriate time. We know ahead of time what time that truck is scheduled to be there and then what time it is scheduled to arrive in Brandon after that rest time.

There is a large concern that unforeseen circumstances are going to be used as a crutch by the industry. I don't think that's the case. We have to meet our obligations in terms of delivery to the plant because they have schedules too. They can't accept unscheduled lateness all the time, so it's in our best interest to plan appropriately, and we have a track record of doing that.

[Tim Louis, Liberal, Kitchener—Conestoga, ON]

Thank you for that.

Maybe I'll turn to Mr. Shantz from Vernla Livestock.

You have a livestock trucking company. Maybe we can talk about delays at the plant. If a trucker is at the end of their shift, at the end of their day, and they're delivering livestock to a plant and they get there and the plant has issues itself, the plant will hold the truck because they don't want truckers to unload unless they know for sure that they can get the plant up and running. If this happens, let's say, in the summer when it's warmer weather, they'll ask a trucker to drive on the road to get airflow again for the animals to cool down. Depending on how long that takes, those drivers could run into a situation where they could run out of hours.

Has that happened, and what kinds of solutions would you suggest for that?

[Don Shantz, Vernla Livestock Inc. and Member, Canadian Livestock Transporters' Alliance]

That has happened in the past. Breakdowns at Conestoga or Sofina have happened and trucks have been lined up, waiting to unload. It's 30°C outside. The animals are getting warm. Everybody knows that they need ventilation. They ask that the trucks leave the site and drive, go out on the highway, get some air flowing through them for, possibly, half an hour and then return to the plant. That adds more driving time to their already tight schedule that day.

They get back to the plant—and, hopefully, things are running again—and get unloaded. It's possible that the driver's time could have expired in the meantime. When that happens, generally the driver is not allowed to park at the plant and needs to leave. It can happen that he needs to exceed his hours of service when he leaves the plant at that point.

[Tim Louis, Liberal, Kitchener—Conestoga, ON]

Thank you for that.

Given the shortness of time here, maybe I'll ask a question of Ms. Fitzgerald from the Livestock Transporters' Alliance.

You're asking for built-in flexibility and for the transport of animals to be considered if an emergency situation happens. We're hearing about these situations that can happen.

With the flexibility comes responsibility. We're hearing about a lack of data. Is there currently a procedure in place to report incidents of emergencies that would cause drivers to go over their required time limits, and would you, in any way, recommend some sort of a reporting procedure to build data so that the industry and the ministry can see how this is happening and whether it can be mitigated? Basically, how can the government and industry work together to collect this data to help with planning and decision-making?

[Susan Fitzgerald]

Thank you for the question.

What drivers are doing now when they're making that decision to go over their hours of service to benefit the animals in their care is recording the reason for that overage in their electronic logging device. That would be noted in case an inspection officer were to ask for their electronic logging device and noticed that they were over their hours of service. Certainly there is the opportunity, with time and funds, to run a research project to gather data, but that is going to take time. We have loads of animals being transported every day.

The other thing you'll hear from Transport Canada officials is that Transport Canada does not do the enforcement of their own regulations. The regulations are actually enforced by the provinces and the territories, which is absolutely correct. However, there is an association called the Canadian Council of Motor Transport Administrators. The federal government belongs to that group, as do the provinces and the territories. The mandate of that organization is to provide administrative and regulatory coordination, including interpretation of legislation.

You heard references to there being a guidance document already in existence. It was produced by the association I just mentioned to you, the CCMTA, to which the federal government belongs. It is quite possible for Transport Canada to provide guidance through that organization, of which they're a member, to the enforcement officers.

[The Chair, Liberal, Kody Blois]

Thank you, Ms. Fitzgerald.

Thank you, Mr. Louis.

I'll now give the floor to Mr. Perron for six minutes.

[Yves Perron, Bloc, Berthier—Maskinongé, QC]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

I would like to thank the witnesses for their participation and availability.

I'll start with Ms. Cartwright, from Humane Canada.

You said that the amendment requested to allow flexibility for animal transport was necessary. So you agree that flexibility should be given in situations where animal welfare is at stake, and you support the request.

Is that what you said?

[Barbara Cartwright]

For us, at this point in time, it's really unclear what's being asked for.

We certainly think it's important that, if there's an animal welfare emergency, there needs to be recognition of that.

What we're also hearing is that it's industry practice. We hear about flexibility being needed. We've heard other terms, such as “extenuating circumstances” and “flexibility”, and then discussion about systemic issues. Systemic issues aren't unforeseeable. They are part of a poorly organized system, whether we're talking about routes or locations for rest stops. This all needs to be considered from the animal welfare perspective.

If guidance is required on subsection 76(1)—and we appreciate what's being asked for by our industry colleagues—then we would like to see that it's done and that it's done not just with industry but also with others, like us and our industry partners.

I hear and understand the idea that this could create loopholes, and that's not the intention. I think the person before said...though I don't think that's the case, but let's ensure that it's not the case and that the guidance is really focused on animal welfare emergencies.

[Yves Perron, Bloc, Berthier—Maskinongé, QC]

Ms. Cartwright, I understand your concern. You want it to apply in exceptional circumstances, in order to ensure animal welfare. If that were the case, you would be in favour of clarifying the description given in guidance document on section 76 of the regulations in question.

In your remarks, you also mentioned that infrastructure changes would be desirable. This brings me back to the subject I touched on earlier. More generally, it would also be desirable for the government to create conditions that are more favourable to regional processing sites, so that there is less concentration. This could have the secondary effect of improving animal welfare.

Do you agree with that approach?

[Barbara Cartwright]

To clarify, yes, we support closer regional processing systems to reduce transit times, if that's what you're asking.