Agriculture Committee on Feb. 29th, 2024

[Alistair MacGregor, NDP, Cowichan—Malahat—Langford, BC]

Do you have an approximate number of how many are identifying as indigenous versus non-indigenous?

[Shannon Nix]

From our consultations with industry, we estimate that somewhere between 15% and 25% are indigenous, representing about 40% of the horses exported for slaughter.

[Alistair MacGregor, NDP, Cowichan—Malahat—Langford, BC]

You said the consultations and the reaction to the bill were difficult, I think. If this bill comes to pass, are options being explored for a transition phase that would allow them to move to other areas of animal husbandry and so on?

[Shannon Nix]

As the committee knows, this appeared in the Minister of Agriculture's mandate letter commitment in December 2021, and as my colleague from the CBSA has already noted, as it's currently drafted there's an 18-month implementation period before it comes into effect.

[Alistair MacGregor, NDP, Cowichan—Malahat—Langford, BC]

Thank you. I have one final question, Mr. Chair.

I was wondering, Ms. Nix, if the department could formally table with this committee a summary of those consultations so that we as committee members can use them to better inform ourselves about this bill.

[Shannon Nix]

I can take that back, yes.

[The Chair, Liberal, Kody Blois]

Thank you, Mr. MacGregor.

Colleagues, that brings us to the end of the first panel.

There are a couple of housekeeping issues. You would have received from the clerk a proposed budget for both this study, Bill C-355, and the horticulture sector. We're seeking unanimous consent to approve the budget as distributed.

[Some hon. members]

Agreed.

[The Chair, Liberal, Kody Blois]

I recognize my good Maritimes colleague Mr. Long, from Saint John—Rothesay, who has graced us with his presence here today on the agriculture committee.

Thank you to the officials for joining us here today and for your work on behalf of all Canadians.

Colleagues, we'll suspend for two or three minutes to bring up the next panel. Thank you

[The Chair, Liberal, Kody Blois]

We're going to move forward, colleagues.

We have with us today, as part of the second panel, Ms. Kaitlyn Mitchell from Animal Justice, who is the director of legal advocacy.

Welcome. Thank you for being here with us in person in Ottawa.

From Equestrian Canada, we have Melanie McLearon, director of marketing and communications, who is joining us by video conference.

Welcome, Ms. McLearon.

From Racetracks of Canada Inc., we have Ms. Katherine Curry, who is the president.

Thank you so much for being here.

You have five minutes for opening remarks. Then we're going to turn to questions.

We will have to handle some votes in the back half. Hopefully, we can continue to work on good UC and keep moving forward.

Go ahead, Ms. Mitchell, for up to five minutes.

[Kaitlyn Mitchell, Director, Legal Advocacy, Animal Justice]

Good afternoon. Thank you very much for the opportunity to appear before the committee today to speak to this incredibly important issue.

As Canada's leading national animal law organization, Animal Justice wholeheartedly supports Bill C-355, which would end the export of live horses from Canada for slaughter overseas. This is a relatively new practice, which appears to have started less than 20 years ago, when an American company relocated to western Canada.

Exporting live horses to Japan for slaughter causes significant and unnecessary suffering to horses. For this reason, the vast majority of Canadians from all provinces and of all political stripes support a ban on this practice.

Horses shipped to Japan for slaughter endure an extremely long and stressful journey and are subjected to conditions that are much worse than those sport and show horses see when transported to and from events. I've observed these shipments with my own eyes many times at the Winnipeg airport. I have watched as workers jab horses with poles to get them off the trucks and have seen them loaded into small wooden crates barely larger than their bodies. Once they're in these open-sided crates, they wait on the noisy airport tarmac to be loaded onto the planes, even during frigid winter temperatures.

In contrast, Air Canada's equine transport service ships a maximum of 18 horses per flight, ensuring spacious conditions and humane conditions for transport. Horses transported for slaughter are often loaded onto flights that carry 100 horses—or even more—at a time. You heard a lot this morning about how the rules are the same, but in practice the conditions are different.

The committee has before it clear and compelling scientific evidence showing that the way horses are exported for slaughter, the way they are treated, is completely unacceptable and puts them at risk of fear, panic, extreme thirst, hunger, fatigue, injury and illness. Some have even died en route.

Tragic incidents of horses dying during transport or becoming seriously injured are deeply concerning and highlight the dangerous nature of this practice. However, I want to be clear that even when horses survive the journey without any apparent injuries, their welfare can still be severely compromised, as the expert evidence before you clearly shows. These are animals with a high centre of gravity, highly sensitive hearing and strong flight instincts. Recent scientific research shows that even short road trips of three or more hours can affect horses' endocrine and immune functions.

The time to end this practice is now.

I've heard some committee members suggest that our existing laws are enough to protect horses exported for slaughter, but as an animal protection lawyer, I would like to be absolutely clear that this is not the case. Provincial animal welfare laws and the federal Criminal Code are seldom used in the agricultural context. They are primarily applied when someone is deliberately cruel to an animal, such as beating an animal or starving them. Suffering caused by standard industry practices, including transport overseas, is exempt.

The health of animals regulations prohibit transporting horses for more than 28 hours without food, water and rest, but even that meagre limit is not always enforced. Just this week, Animal Justice was in court in Winnipeg, where a judge agreed to lay a charge against a horse export company for a shipment that went well over the legal limit and during which at least three horses collapsed. The CFIA refused to take enforcement action.

We calculate how long these horses are denied food, water and rest based on when the plane touches down in Japan, as if the second they land they're given food and water and they can immediately rest. Of course, we know that's not the case. The reality is that the horses' journey is far from over at that point. After the dozens of horses are unloaded from the planes and taken out of their crates, they're loaded onto trucks and then transported to quarantine facilities. The fact is, I don't know how long that journey takes. We simply do not know how much longer the journey goes on after the plane touches down, but it raises serious concerns that many of these shipments may actually go over the 28-hour limit.

I urge you to support Bill C-355 and bring our laws in line with the values of Canadians.

Thank you. I look forward to your questions.

[The Chair, Liberal, Kody Blois]

Thank you, Ms. Mitchell.

We'll now turn to Ms. McLearon with Equestrian Canada for up to five minutes.

[Melanie McLearon, Director, Marketing and Communications, Equestrian Canada]

Thank you.

I'd like to begin by expressing my gratitude for the opportunity to address the committee. As the governing body for equestrian sport and industry in Canada, Equestrian Canada wholeheartedly supports initiatives aimed at safeguarding the health and welfare of horses. However, we do believe that certain aspects of the bill require careful consideration to avoid unintended consequences for an important sector of our equine industry.

We would like to highlight the importance of defining the term “export” as it pertains to the transport of horses, and I know this has been discussed at length at the committee today. It is important, however, to distinguish, perhaps in the preamble or in other definitions, that air travel is utilized for horses for other purposes in the sport sector. The transportation of sport horses by air for competition, sales and training is an integral part of equestrian sport and is a standard practice for other national equestrian organizations represented in our voting membership in the breed sector.

Travel difficulties can be a source of stress, and mitigating any delays and ensuring smooth transport for horses that are legitimately travelling for sport are a horse welfare issue. If delays are forced on horses by this legislation, that could be a significant deterrent to the practice of horses legitimately travelling for sport.

We'd like to stress the distinction between horses for slaughter and those involved in sport and breeding. Ambiguous language may hinder legitimate transportation, and we want to ensure that it does not impact the equestrian community negatively. We're also asking that there be some consideration for a comprehensive transition plan, if this were to go ahead.

Our jurisdiction only covers active equines in Canada, those involved in sport and recreation activities, but we do have concerns, under the fundamental values of our organization, about the love of horses and the requirement for us to advocate for the welfare of horses in the lives of all Canadians.

We acknowledge that the bill's intent is to protect horse health, but we would like to emphasize the need to recognize the implications of welfare and equine care without forethought and planning. The necessity of implementing a comprehensive plan to support the industry's transition away from the export for slaughter practice is highly important, as is the need to avoid unnecessary pain and suffering for the horses that will be affected by the transition.

We would like to propose a transition plan that would include financial support, education and resources for the horse owners, breeders and stakeholders who are involved in the current industry. We are open as an organization and willing to play a supportive and consultative role in this so horses can be transitioned to other purposes such as sport or recreation. This transition plan should aim to protect and care for horses that are affected by this transition.

We appreciate and would like to let everyone know that we understand this is about a dedication to animal welfare. That is reflected in the bill and the passionate response that led to it.

We are in support of measures to eliminate the export of horses for slaughter. However, we would like to advocate for a more nuanced approach that includes clarifying language, especially to highlight the diverse uses of horses travelling by air, but also to highlight that there are potential unintended consequences of immediately ending an industry without the proper support. We believe that a balanced approach is necessary to safeguard horse welfare overall and in a variety of circumstances.

I'd like to thank the committee for your time and attention to this and express my trust in your careful consideration of all aspects, including considerations that we've brought forward as the bill progresses through the legislative process. I encourage continued efforts to promote animal welfare while maintaining a balanced approach to the challenges faced by our equine community.

[The Chair, Liberal, Kody Blois]

Thank you very much.

We'll now turn to Ms. Curry for up to fives minutes.

[Katherine Curry, President, Racetracks of Canada Inc.]

I'd like to thank the committee for inviting me to speak to you today with respect to private member's bill C-355.

I'm the president and chair of Racetracks of Canada. We're an industry association that represents the 30 racetracks across this country, including standardbred, thoroughbred and a one-quarter horse track in Ajax. Our mandate is to further the interests of the horse-racing industry and advocate for racetrack operations across Canada.

Canada's horse-racing industry represents $5.7 billion in annual GDP, employs over 47,000 people and has over 45,000 active horses. We unequivocally support Bill C-355. Racetracks absolutely do not condone the slaughter of horses. In fact, each track has programs in place to prevent this procedure and practice with respect to racehorses.

Having said that, we want to ensure there's no impact caused by Bill C-355 with respect to the ability to transport horses into and out of the country for racing purposes. It may be as simple as a sentence in the bill that exempts either horses being transported for sport or horses being transported for horse-racing purposes.

I'm happy to answer any questions, and I thank you again for your time today.

[The Chair, Liberal, Kody Blois]

Thank you very much.

We'll turn right to questions.

We're going to start with Mr. Barlow for up to six minutes.

[John Barlow, Conservative, Foothills, AB]

Thanks, Mr. Chair.

Thanks to our witnesses for being here.

I'll turn to Equestrian Canada first.

You were talking about the concern regarding the unintended consequences of Bill C-355. You were talking about the potential consequences. What would be the financial implications if this bill were to pass unamended?

You were talking about the impact it could have on breeding and on horses coming to and from Canada for events, festivals and shows. Do you have any data on what the financial implications of this could be?

[Melanie McLearon]

We haven't looked at the financials, so I can't give you a number. However, I do know that based on the number of.... We have 15,000 members actively competing in horse sport in Canada and internationally. We have 1,200 FEI athletes—those who compete on the international stage. They are the ones typically transporting their horses for sport purposes. That happens multiple times throughout the year, depending on where they're going for competitions.

For our breeding sector and for anyone who is doing training or other breeding, the numbers for who is bringing horses in via air for those reasons would be much higher. There is no number we can put on it. For us, the main focus is on the horses' welfare and how it could cause concern on airport grounds. If that's hindering a horse from travelling to an event, it can also have unintended consequences at the event itself, potentially stopping an athlete from going to a competition that they need to be at to qualify for the Olympic Games this year, for example.

There are so many unintended consequences that are not about the dollar value for us. However, it would be significant, but I don't have the numbers in front of me.

[John Barlow, Conservative, Foothills, AB]

Thank you. If you're able to do that, that data would be helpful.

You led to my next question.

I have Spruce Meadows in my riding. I have the Calgary Polo Club in my riding. What would be the impact, again, if this is not amended for international competitions? We have horses from around the world coming to ridings across Canada to show and compete. In your opinion, would this bill be an impediment to those international and national competitions, with international competitors not wanting to come to Canada to deal with the additional hoops they'd have to go through?

[Melanie McLearon]

Yes, one hundred per cent.

We had an instance, in fact, recently when we were trying to host a Nations Cup event in Bromont, Quebec. Actually, we weren't hosting it, but we were helping with the sanctioning and support of one of our big event venues. We had some challenges with the ability of teams from different countries to come in due to some legislation.

We also experience this when the teams are not willing to come because they're concerned about what will happen when they leave. This would be the identical situation. There would be some potential for athletes from other countries not wanting to come if they felt they might get stuck or had concerns exporting their horses when leaving the country. A lot of times, people who are going to international competitions, such as those as Spruce Meadows, would be coming from a variety of different areas and potentially going directly to another area in the world, with horses flying—

[John Barlow, Conservative, Foothills, AB]

Thanks for that. I have a limited amount of time and I have a couple of other questions to ask.

If you can, answer this quickly.

We've had some discrepancy between the Canadian Food Inspection Agency, the proponent of this bill and, I'm certain, the comments from Animal Justice. Some say there are different standards for horses being transported by air for slaughter and horses being transported by air for other events.

Is that an accurate statement? Are the standards the same regardless of the end use of the animal?

[Melanie McLearon]

I'm sorry. I'm not an expert and am unable to answer that question. All I know is how our horses are transported. I can't speak to the differences.

However, I can speak to the fact that most people are not aware of how those transports happen, and that is one of our major concerns. If the language is not clear in this legislation, things could be misinterpreted. That is one of our biggest concerns with the way it has been written.

[John Barlow, Conservative, Foothills, AB]

Thanks. I appreciate that.

Ms. Mitchell, thanks for coming.

You're very adamant that the standards are different, but the CFIA was here saying the standards are exactly the same.

Do you have proof that the CFIA is judging one animal differently from the next when they are inspecting the loads before they leave?

[Kaitlyn Mitchell]

I think it's very important to clarify that. I absolutely did not say the standards or laws are different. The law is the same—the health of animals regulations. It's the practice.

[John Barlow, Conservative, Foothills, AB]

However, you said they were judging those things differently.

The rules are the same, and you were agreeing with that.