Bill C-275

An Act to amend the Health of Animals Act (biosecurity on farms)

This enactment amends the Health of Animals Act to make it an offence to enter, without lawful authority or excuse, a place in which animals are kept if doing so could reasonably be expected to result in the exposure of the animals to a disease or toxic substance that is capable of affecting or contaminating them.

Health of Animals Act

[John Barlow, Conservative, Foothills, AB]

moved that Bill C-275, An Act to amend the Health of Animals Act (biosecurity on farms), be read the second time and referred to a committee.

Mr. Speaker, it is an honour to rise to speak to my private member's bill.

I have always been taught that if at first we do not succeed, try and try again. I was honoured to have the support of every party in the House in the previous Parliament for my private member's bill, but, unfortunately, an election was called and it died on the Order Paper. Therefore, I am pleased to bring this forward once again on behalf of some of my constituents and farm families across Canada.

I will start my presentation speaking about a family in my riding.

In 2019, I received a call from a farm family in the southern part of my riding that owned a free-range turkey farm. The family members were distraught about what they were supposed to do with a number of protesters who had trespassed on their farm near Fort Macleod. They really had no understanding of what was taking place or what they did to deserve this.

I would ask members how they would feel if they woke up in the morning, went to check their animals, opened the barn and saw 45 protesters trying to take their turkeys off the property. The Tschetter family was really quite distraught. They did not know how to handle this and what to expect. This raised concerns with me about the protection not only of private property, but the biosecurity of those animals and the mental health of that family.

Less than two weeks before, many of these same protesters were on a hog operation in Abbotsford, B.C., where the Binnendyk family had a similar issue. The wife phoned her husband and son to tell them that there were more than 200 protesters in their family's breeding barn. Those protesters, and probably unbeknownst to them, did not understand the very strict biosecurity protocols that farm families had to follow. Those protesters may very well not have realized that they could have been carrying a virus or pest from one farm, the hog farm in Abbotsford, B.C., to a turkey farm in southern Alberta. We have very strict protocols on farms, and they are there for a reason, which is to protect the biosecurity and the health of those animals.

However, not only did the protesters put those animals at risk, but they had a very serious impact on those families. Even when I speak to members of the Tschetter today, they are still upset about what occurred on their farm and are still hesitant when they check their barns.

Calvin Binnendyk, whose hog farm in Abbotsford was impacted, said “I had quite a few sleepless nights, and it was rough on my family, especially my wife, even though she doesn’t even work in the barn. She took it really hard, and she still has a hard time sleeping to this day.” This is three years after that occurrence on their farm.

It is because of these two elements that I bring forward this private member's bill, which would amend the Health of Animals Act.

Bill C-275 proposes to make it an offence to enter, without lawful authority or excuse, a place in which animals are kept if doing so could result in the exposure of animals to disease or toxic substance capable of affecting or contaminating those animals. Simply put, this amendment would apply existing penalties within the act to people who trespass on farm property and facilities where animals are kept.

There is a key element to this as well. This would add a very significant fine to those organizations that encourage this type of behaviour. There is no question that those organizations, which, up to this point, are very unlikely to be held accountable, are fundraising off these actions. They videotape those trespassers and protesters who come onto a farm and they fundraise off that. In case of the farm family in Abbotsford, B.C., many of the pictures and videos that they were showing, according to the court case, never happened on that farm at all. They were staged and, in some cases, allegedly faked.

However, I want to state very clearly for everyone in the House and those listening at home what this legislation would not do.

The bill would not, in any way, disallow protesters from protesting on public property about the issues that they are passionate about and that are important to them. They can hold those rallies and protests outside the farm gate, but there has to be a line in the sand. When they cross that line onto private property and put the health of animals at risk as well as the mental health of our farm families at risk, there has to be a line there. There have to be strict rules in place to deter that action.

The bill would also not stop whistle-blowers from bringing forward cases if they witness practices that jeopardize the safety and welfare of farmers. Canadian farmers and ranchers have the moral and legal obligation to look after their animals. In fact, farmers and their employees are obligated to report any inappropriate actions and any wrongdoing they see happening on a farm, especially because this is a highly regulated atmosphere. They must follow strict codes when it comes to the health, safety and welfare of their farm animals.

I know the members in the House are well aware that there have been numerous actions of protesters on farms. It is becoming more and more daring and reckless.

Only two months ago, an animal rights activist group hung three dead pigs from an overpass in Montreal. I understand this did not happen on a farm, but imagine if one of those pigs had fallen off that overpass and onto the windshield of a passing car? That just symbolizes the extreme lengths that some of these activist groups are willing to go. Again, where did they get those pigs? Were they taken off a farm? They killed them. I do not think that is really protecting the health and welfare of animals.

I know we are going to get some questions about whether we are wading into provincial jurisdiction. Some provinces have implemented something similar. I am proud to say that they were modelled after the legislation I brought forward in the previous Parliament. However, less than half of the provinces and territories have something like this on their books, which shows the federal government and the federal legislators have a leadership role to indicate that there is a line that cannot be crossed.

What this really focuses on is the biosecurity risk and the health of our animals. We saw what COVID did to Canada's economy, a human-borne virus. It devastated not only our economy but economies around the world. Imagine what a similar animal-borne pandemic would do to Canada's agriculture industry. Right now we are experiencing that with avian flu and chicken and egg producers across Canada.

In 2014, in the Fraser Valley, we had 10 farms that had an Al outbreaks and more than 200,000 birds were euthanized.

in 2004, we had a highly pathogenic strain that led to the slaughter of 17 million farm birds. Before that outbreak was eventually brought under control it cost producers $380 million.

We are going through a similar experience right now, where 7.5 million domestic birds across B.C. Alberta, Ontario, Quebec and Saskatchewan have had to be euthanized.

We know that it is only an amount of time before our next concern, and that is African swine fever. This has killed more than half the pigs in China and is spreading to the Asia-Pacific, Central Asia, Eastern Europe and even the Dominican Republic. It is at our doorstep and we have to take precautions to ensure that our producers are protected. If African swine fever were to occur in Canada, it would have a $24 billion economic hit to Canada's pork industry. More than 45,000 people are employed in that industry and 70% of our $4.25-billion industry is exported around the world.

Whether we are prepared to deal with ASF or avian flu is something the agriculture committee will very seriously look into soon, and the threat of transmission is very real. Again, I cannot stress this enough. I know that if any of my colleagues here have toured a chicken farm, or an egg hatchery or a pork operation, they know the protocols that have to be taken, such as putting on a hazmat suit, washing one's boots, putting on booties and a hair-net. If anyone has gone to an animal processing facility, it is very similar. There are very strict protocols and they are there for a reason.

I think that, in many cases, protesters are not willingly putting the biosecurity of those farms at risk but they do not understand the protocols that are in place, which every farm family follows very closely. Those animals are their livelihood and they want to ensure they are treated well. I think all of us in the House understand that. If we can take proactive measures to ensure that these types of animal pandemics do not occur, we want to do that. It is one tool that we are able to use.

We cannot make the same mistake with a potential outbreak on a ranch or farm in Canada. We must take every precaution and use every tool in our took box to ensure we protect our farm families. We know that agriculture and agri-food is going to be a critical pillar of our economy moving forward. To ensure that it can reach its full potential, our farm families need to know that the Government of Canada and the House of Commons stand with them, will protect them and put these measures in place.

Strengthening the biosecurity measures for trespassers is something farmers, ranchers, food processors and farm groups across the country all support. In fact, I have letters from dozens of agriculture and stakeholders groups that are strongly in support of this legislation. I am glad to hear that the Minister of Agriculture has also spoken out, saying the actions of extremist groups protesting on dairy farms are unacceptable, and it is a concern for her. That is good to hear.

We have the support of the Canadian Federation of Agriculture, for example, which said, “The CFA supports in principle, and encourages, [this] private member's bill to support Canadian farmers who have been negatively impacted by activism. We believe that the introduction of this bill is an important and necessary step in the right direction.”

The Canadian Dairy Farmers of Canada said that Canadian dairy farmers were committed to the best care of our herds and were fully engaged in adhering to the highest standards of animal welfare, food quality and biosecurity, and that the amendments proposed by me to the Health of Animals Act would further protect the health and security of our animals.

As I said, the bill would not prohibit peaceful protesting by those groups that want to make a statement on animal welfare, and I appreciate that, but it would ensure the security on our farms and help with the mental health of Canadian farm families.

I hope members in the House will continue to support this legislation, as they did in the previous Parliament. It is very important that we send a leadership message that we support our farm families, that we understand the importance of biosecurity on farms and the protocols that are in place, and that we will protect the mental health of our farm families.

I am speaking especially of families like the Binnendyks and the Tschetters that work hard every single day. These are family generational farms that do all they can to protect their animals, but they also grow high-quality food for Canadian families and food that is exported around the world, helping us feed the world as well. They understand the steps they must take to protect their animals, but they do not understand when protesters cross the line onto private property and, in many cases, do not understand what they do.

I look forward to engaging with my colleagues as we work together to address this very important issue of protecting Canada's food supply, protecting our supply chain and standing up for Canadian farm families.

[Francis Drouin, Liberal, Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Agriculture and Agri-Food]

Mr. Speaker, this is important legislation. It is also an important occasion to educate people about biosecurity measures on farms. I know I cannot walk into a chicken barn without practically putting on a hazmat suit because of biosecurity concerns, especially in a season when we are dealing with avian flu.

It is Mental Health Week this week. I want to ask the hon. member whether he has heard from farmers on how stressful it can be sometimes with the threat of having protesters on their farms, or family businesses.

[John Barlow, Conservative, Foothills, AB]

Mr. Speaker, there is no doubt, especially on the Tschetter farm, for example, that it is doing everything right. It is a free-range turkey farm, yet the protesters still chose its farm, because it is off a main highway, to do their protesting. We know that farmers deal with a number of variables that are out of their control, commodity prices, weather, all of these things, and then add on the potential of protesters coming onto their farms.

Imagine waking up one morning, going into the living room and looking outside, and there are protesters trying to take the family dog because they do not feel it is being treated properly. How would we react? This is exactly what is going on. The protesters are walking into a farmer's backyard and causing extreme mental stress for the family.

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

Mr. Speaker, I thank the member for Foothills for his very important bill.

Obviously, we will work with him to make this bill effective and enforceable, including by focusing it on biosecurity, as he said so well in his speech.

The member spoke about mental health, as did our Liberal colleague just now. This issue is extremely important. Right now, farmers are struggling, especially under the pressures of high inflation.

To round out this bill, does he think that the government should take steps to boost cash flow on farms to make sure that our farm businesses survive, especially the businesses of the next generation?

[John Barlow, Conservative, Foothills, AB]

Mr. Speaker, as one can see, I have a very supportive group on the agriculture committee that I enjoy working with. The member is exactly right. We not only have to ensure that farm families are environmentally and socially sustainable, but it is also critical that they are economically sustainable. Legislation such as this would ensure that their herds and animals are protected.

It also raises important awareness among Canadians that maybe what they are seeing on social media is not exactly accurate. Farmers invest tens of thousands of dollars, and in some cases hundreds of thousands of dollars, to ensure that the biosecurity protocols in place, which are put forward by the Canadian Food Inspection Agency and provincial bodies, are followed to the letter.

Absolutely, it is critically important. Any opportunity we have to allow farmers to be economically viable for the next generation is a critical tool that we must give those farm families.

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

Mr. Speaker, I support the principle of this legislation, but I do believe it needs further scrutiny when it comes to committee. Is my colleague from Foothills aware that there was an Animal Justice report from 2021 that looked at disease outbreaks and biosecurity failures on Canadian farms? It listed hundreds of these incidents, and they were all from authorized personnel on farms.

He knows this version of the legislation is not the same as the version that was reported back to the House in the previous Parliament. There is a reference to being on the farm with “lawful authority or excuse”. I am wondering if the member for Foothills can explain the discrepancy, given that we have so many biosecurity failures from authorized personnel. If we are serious about biosecurity, should we not be concentrating on making it applicable to everyone who is on a farm, to ensure they are following the standard protocols?

[John Barlow, Conservative, Foothills, AB]

Mr. Speaker, my colleague's comments show that the system does work in many cases for those authorized persons on farm. They are making those reports. That does show they are bringing forward issues when they see that the protocol, standards or procedures on farm are not being followed. This legislation would not stop that. They are legally obligated to come forward, as a farmer or an employee on a farm, to an authorized person if they see something on farm that is not following the protocol.

To my colleague's point, his argument shows that it is actually working. What I am focusing on are those who are there with no permission to come on that farm. Again, when it comes to committee, I am more than willing to work with my colleague to ensure we can get this legislation passed.

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

Mr. Speaker, as a former member of the agriculture committee, I was well aware, when we were in government, what a robust system of traceability we actually have. I also came to learn, which the member would know too, that herds affected by protesters who bring in potential disease take generations to build at times. It takes 50 years to build up one particular herd. Can the member please speak to the risk that could possibly be posed to the family herd if this legislation does not pass?

[John Barlow, Conservative, Foothills, AB]

Mr. Speaker, the member brings up a very good point. Many Canadians do not understand the decades of work that goes into building up the genetics, whether it is beef, pork or in the feathers' barns. It is not something one can replace overnight. We are certainly seeing that with the avian flu, where it is taking months to get the numbers back up. When it comes to bovine spongiform encephalopathy in Alberta, or BSE, many of those farms are 20 years past and still have not built up their herd numbers from 25 years ago. It sometimes takes a generation to get the genetics back to where it was.

[Francis Drouin, Liberal, Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Agriculture and Agri-Food]

Mr. Speaker, I want to thank the member for Foothills for introducing Bill C-275, an act to amend the Health of Animals Act, a private member's bill. As previously indicated, this bill was drafted in response to individuals and groups entering private property such as farms. The right to peaceful protest is fundamental to a democratic society. However, trespassing on farms is unacceptable.

The health and safety of our farmers and their animals are crucial. Incidents of trespassing on farms have made Canadian farmers anxious and have raised concerns about the health and safety of their animals. We recognize the purpose of this private member's bill, Bill C‑275, but we also have a responsibility to ensure that any legislative provision in this area does not have any unintended consequences.

I would like to draw the attention of members to two items to take into consideration. First, Bill C‑275, as worded, creates legal risks. Second, existing federal and provincial statutes can be used for managing cases of trespassing on farms. These matters need to be carefully taken into account before any changes to this bill can be considered.

As most of us know, agriculture is a jurisdiction shared by the federal and provincial governments. Generally speaking, the federal government is only responsible for agricultural practices and operations on farms. However, the bill as it stands would probably not fall under federal jurisdiction in this area, given that it generally applies to any building or enclosed area in which animals are kept on a farm or the area outside. Furthermore, the bill seems to focus more on prohibiting trespassing by protesters than on protecting animals from the spread of disease.

Provinces and territories have authority in the areas of property rights and civil rights, which includes passing laws concerning trespassing. Most provinces already have laws against trespassing on farms and other places.

In recent years, five provinces—Alberta, Saskatchewan, Manitoba, Ontario and Prince Edward Island—have passed strong legislation prohibiting trespassing on farms or any places where animals are kept.

For instance, in 2019, Alberta amended its Petty Trespass Act to prohibit entry into a farm or farmland without the permission of the property owner or occupant. Someone convicted under the act could be fined up to $10,000 or face six months in prison. A corporation could face a fine of up to $200,000 if convicted under this act.

This example shows that the provinces already have laws governing trespassing on private property. The wording of Bill C-275 also shows this bill seeks to regulate trespassing on private property. This is clearly stated in the part that reads, “No person shall, without lawful authority or excuse, enter a building or other enclosed place”. Accordingly, the current wording of Bill C-275 could be seen as infringing on existing provincial legislation.

At the federal level, the Criminal Code criminalizes activity related to trespassing, such as mischief and breaking and entering. In fact, I know of two recent cases where the Criminal Code was successfully used to lay charges against people who had trespassed on farms. One was in British Columbia and the other in Quebec.

I would like to say a little more about the case in British Columbia, because it shows how existing legislation is working to allow charges to be laid against people who trespass on farms.

In 2019, a number of people broke into the Excelsior Hog Farm in Abbotsford, British Columbia, to raise awareness about farming practices they believed were detrimental to animal welfare. Two of the individuals who broke into the farm were convicted and subsequently sentenced under the Criminal Code.

The judge took certain factors into account when deciding their sentence, as is required under the Criminal Code. For example, in this particular case, the judge considered the negative impact the trespassing had on the farmer and the farm's operation. As a result, the trespassers were sentenced to 30 days in jail and 12 months' probation.

What I am saying is that the existing laws work, plain and simple. As the judge in the British Columbia case noted, this verdict, which included a jail term, was intended to send a message to discourage others from engaging in this type of activity.

The bill of the member for Foothills certainly sheds light on farmer and animal health. While it is crucial that we support farmers with the tools they need to carry out their important work, we need to be mindful of how best to do that without creating legal challenges. Fundamentally, legislation should not introduce new legal issues. It should also complement, not duplicate, the laws we already have.

That is why our government will be supporting Bill C-275 with amendments. Specifically, we will look to move amendments that meet the spirit and intent of Bill C-275, while lowering the legal risks that we have identified.

Rather than broadly prohibiting unlawful entry into any building or other place, we propose an amendment to more narrowly prohibit entry into on-farm biosecurity zones where animals are kept, except in accordance with established biosecurity protocols. Such an amendment would support the strong biosecurity measures that many farmers have already put in place on Canadian farms.

This amendment would also mitigate against the legal issues I outlined earlier. By shifting the focus to entry into on-farm biosecurity zones, it would bring the bill under federal jurisdiction because it would be more clearly related to agricultural options inside the farm gate. It would also reinforce the benefit of biosecurity zones, which are an important part of agricultural practices to prevent the spread of animal disease.

Many may wonder why we are supporting this bill when we did not support its predecessor, Bill C-205. Let me be clear: As I have noted, we do have concerns with the legal risks associated with this bill as currently written. However, we have taken the time to consider previous debates and testimony on this matter. We have listened to stakeholders, and almost all have stressed the importance of biosecurity to prevent the spread of animal disease to animals. Upon further analysis, we have identified an amendment that focuses more squarely on biosecurity and provides a better alternative to the current wording of Bill C-275. This amendment would emphasize to Canadians that biosecurity is serious and necessary to prevent the spread of animal disease, while recognizing there is existing legislation to address trespassing.

We recognize the efforts of the hon. member for Foothills in trying to protect farmers. However, it is important that we find the right balance with the bill and discern the best way forward, considering the legal risks. Should Bill C-275 be referred to committee, we will move an amendment to ensure that the bill addresses the legal risks that have been identified.

The government looks forward to further discussions on this important topic. We are eager to discuss ways we can amend Bill C-275 to provide supports to farmers and protect the health of their animals.

Once again, I want to thank the member for Foothills. We have heard about every issue that has been ongoing over the past few years and past decades on farms. This week we are acknowledging it is Mental Health Week, and I think this bill would address some of the measures and some of the stresses that farmers face on their farms. I want to thank the member for Foothills for putting this bill forward.

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

Mr. Speaker, I would like to begin by thanking the member for Foothills for introducing this bill. I also want to say that I appreciate the comments made by the parliamentary secretary, who basically told us that the government will work with us to come up with an enforceable bill. That is great. It is good news because our duty, as parliamentarians, is to work for our constituents. Our farmers need additional protection so that they no longer have to experience the atrocities that they have endured and over the past few months and years.

This bill seeks to eliminate the growing problem of trespassing. I would like every member of the House to take a few minutes to think about what trespassing means. We may find it hard to empathize with farmers when we think of it in terms of farm businesses, so let us consider it in terms of a more relatable scenario.

I am going to use the same scenario that I did when we spoke about Bill C-205. Imagine if you were to arrive home to find four or five people sitting in your living room, and that they tell you that they do not like the way you run your home, that it is inconsistent with their values. You ask them to leave, but they will not. You cannot remove them by force because you might get into trouble and be criminally charged, so you just have to live with it.

The real-life example that I always use is the case of the Porgreg farm in Saint‑Hyacinthe because it is the most blatant. Farm staff had to put up with this kind of situation for many hours. Even when the police showed up and asked the protesters to leave, they remained seated. They were taking pictures and saying that they wanted to protect the animals whose health and safety they were jeopardizing. Afterwards, it was discovered that a disease had been introduced into the herd because biosecurity protocols had been violated.

I think that “biosecurity” is a very important concept we must keep in mind. This was mentioned by the member for Foothills and the parliamentary secretary. Focusing on biosecurity may be the right approach to take. As federal representatives, we must find a way forward. I appreciate what the parliamentary secretary said about jurisdictions. As members know, the Bloc Québécois also likes to respect the jurisdictions of Quebec and the provinces. I believe that is something we generally agree on. Nevertheless, I believe that we can work as a team, as we do in committee. That is the sense I am getting from the debates we are hearing today. We must find a way to better protect our agricultural producers against this unacceptable abuse.

This is not about questioning the values of people who are vegans. That is not the issue. It is also not about limiting freedom of expression, because any freedom ends where the rights and freedoms of others begin. There is one thing we often tend to forget and that we really need to remember: the rights of the individual are not absolute. I am sorry to have to tell my colleagues that when someone claims to be exercising their right to freedom of expression by criminally assaulting another person, that is not exercising a right but committing a crime. Parliament must absolutely put a stop to that. That is why we need to work on this issue.

We ask agricultural producers to take strict precautions when it comes to meeting health standards. A few of the possible infections were named earlier. One of them is African swine fever, which is having devastating effects around the world. Thankfully, it has not reached Canada yet, and we are taking every precaution to ensure that it stays that way. We are not going to allow certain individuals to jeopardize the biosecurity of agricultural establishments, which could lead to contamination.

Bovine spongiform encephalopathy, foot and mouth disease and avian flu are also risks. Quebec currently has confirmed cases of avian flu. The Canadian Food Inspection Agency is advising producers not to go into fields if they see wild birds there, to avoid the risk of contaminating their establishment.

These producers are always careful and are looking for ways to protect their facility. They shower before they enter and they change their clothes. We cannot have people deciding to jeopardize all that based on an ideology that is a little extreme, and so I believe it is our job to be doing this.

In and of itself, Bill C‑275 is pretty straightforward: It prohibits people from entering a production facility if it would compromise biosecurity. I think the biosecurity element is already there. I am quite willing to work with the parliamentary secretary and the member for Foothills to find common ground, but it is imperative that we get this bill passed.

In fact, we studied it in detail in the previous Parliament, as part of Bill C‑205. This is one of too many bills that we have had to start from scratch. We need the opportunity to do this efficiently so we do not have to go through this process a third time. The committee is able to work quickly and efficiently by analyzing the scope of Bill C‑275 with experts.

First, the issues raised by the parliamentary secretary seem legitimate. Obviously, as I always say, we will work carefully and diligently in committee in order to adopt a bill that is real, that will send a positive message to the farming community and a clear message to people who have any intention of demonstrating, a bill that is actually enforceable. This third condition is important. That is what we are here for and why we will do serious work.

The issue of shared jurisdiction was raised again. This bill also raises the issue of animal and mental health. This was mentioned earlier by two members who spoke before me. This being Mental Health Week, let us take this opportunity to protect our farmers whose life is already challenging. It is already so tough.

I am thinking of pork production. A processing plant in Quebec closed recently, which is having tremendous repercussions on production and jeopardizes several producers who might have to withdraw from farming. It is no joke. Are we going to allow threats, intimidation and gratuitous assault on top of that? The answer is no. As a Parliament, I think we have a duty to say no.

I want to come back to what happened at the Porgreg farm in 2019 because it is a perfect example. As I said earlier, there was disease within the herd. Someone will surely say that laws already exist governing this, which is true. However, it can be difficult to make the connection between the disease and the trespassing incident in a court of law. It also means that these individuals must lodge a complaint and go through the justice system, thus reliving the assault, which can also be difficult. We therefore need to improve and clarify the process. It would be great if we could enhance these protections.

During the incident at the Porgreg farm, there was a biosecurity breach and the doors were left open for many hours. It was -12° outside. Diesel fuel was also contaminated with water. How do prosecutors prove that the attackers put water in the diesel fuel? There are a number of ways.

Significant measures must be put in place to deter wrongdoers. We need to send a clear message that if they do these kinds of things, it will cost them and their organization dearly. In committee, I will pay particular attention to ensuring that fines and penalties are directed not only at individuals, but also at the organizations that sponsor them.

The member for Foothills spoke earlier about pigs hanging from an overpass in Montreal. This is the same organization that trespassed at Les Porgreg farm and claimed responsibility. It is clear what kind of people we are dealing with. These are extremists who are not afraid of anything and who are ready to face criminal charges.

There must be more significant consequences if we want to discourage these kinds of activities. Our agricultural producers deserve this. They need to know that we respect them, that we appreciate their work, that we want them to carry on for a long time and that we will protect them.

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

Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to be standing in the House to give my remarks with respect to Bill C-275, an act to amend the Health of Animals Act, biosecurity on farms. This was introduced by the member for Foothills. I will add to my colleague's comments to say that it is a pleasure to work with the member on the agriculture committee.

Despite what the public sees in question period, we, as members of all parties, actually do get along with each other. I find some of our most rewarding work happens at committee, specifically the agriculture committee, which bucks the trend of many committees because, whatever political party one may be a member of, we all represent farmers, and we all have their interests at heart.

This is the member's second attempt. The first was in the previous Parliament with Bill C-205. I last had the opportunity to debate that legislation at second reading in late 2020. Here we are in 2023, and it may not be the most efficient process, but we had the journey of the previous bill interrupted by an unnecessary election at the time.

Let us get to the purported why of this bill, which centres on biosecurity. We know there are many diseases that pose a risk to farm animals. They include African swine fever; bovine spongiform encephalopathy, or BSE; foot and mouth disease; and avian flu. Many of these diseases do keep our researchers and scientists up at night. I recently had a conversation with the deans council of agriculture and veterinary schools across Canada. They are leading some of the efforts in looking at these diseases, and they are quite concerned, particularly with avian influenza.

Generally speaking, biosecurity at the farm level can be defined as management practices that allow producers to prevent the movement of disease-causing agents onto and off of their operations because, if one farm operator does notice an outbreak of disease, they want to contain that to prevent its spread to other farms. Generally speaking, there are three key principles: isolation, traffic control and sanitation. With Bill C-275, we are mainly looking at the principle of traffic control: controlling who is coming into contact with on-farm animals.

We know that visitors to farms can unknowingly bring harmful agents. They can bring them via contaminated clothing and footwear, with equipment and with their vehicles.

I will talk about some of my personal experiences. In my riding of Cowichan—Malahat—Langford, I have had the pleasure of visiting local farms, including Farmer Ben's Eggs and Lockwood Farms, which are both egg-producing operations. I keep a small flock of chickens on my property. I raise my own chickens, and I like to eat the eggs from them. With the dangers of avian influenza, I was not allowed to come into contact with my own birds for the space of an entire week before visiting a commercial operation, and of course, I had to take very strict measures with my footwear before I was allowed anywhere near the birds.

In a previous life, I used to be a tree planter in the interior of British Columbia. I was planting trees on the Douglas Lake Ranch, a ranch near Merritt, British Columbia, which, of course, is the largest working cattle ranch in B.C. The ranch has such vast properties that many of them are harvested in timber operations. Before our tree-planting operation was allowed anywhere onto the property, we had to have all of our vehicles sanitized to make sure that there was no danger of foot and mouth disease being transferred to the operation.

This just gives members a sense of the operations that are currently in place. I know this is replicated in farms across the country, but these are operations that I have personally witnessed and had to partake in.

Now let us get to the what. We have an existing federal statute, the Health of Animals Act. It is primarily responsible for diseases and toxic substances that may affect animals, or be transmitted by animals to persons, and it looks at their protection. In existing sections of the statute, there are provisions that deal with the concealment of the existence of a reportable disease, the keeping of diseased animals, bringing diseased animals to market, and selling or disposing of diseased animals. That is the current state of some of the existing sections of the federal legislation and what they are hoping to achieve.

Bill C-275 seeks to amend the existing Health of Animals Act by adding a proposed section 9.1. I will read the key section: “No person shall, without lawful authority or excuse, enter a building or other enclosed place in which animals are kept, or take in any animal or thing, knowing that or being reckless as to whether entering such a place or taking in the animal or thing could result in the exposure of the animals to a disease or toxic substance that is capable of affecting or contaminating them.” Of course, further on in the bill, there is a new series of penalties for individuals and groups that would violate this new section, consistent with existing provisions of the Health of Animals Act.

I also want to take some time during my speech to outline some of the concerns, because we would not be doing our job as parliamentarians if we did not look at both sides of the argument, and I think this is what our committee really needs to take into account. There are animal rights groups that feel that the legislation represents what they call “ag-gag” legislation, meaning they feel that they are going to be silenced or prevented from taking actions they deem to be in the best interest of farm animals.

As other speakers have outlined, if the bill is about stopping trespassing and not about shoring up biosecurity, it would be unconstitutional, because we all know that, under our current Constitution Act, jurisdiction over property and civil rights belongs firmly within the provincial realm. We do not want to interfere with the rights of provincial legislatures to make such laws. Of course, as I referenced in my question, there is an Animal Justice report from 2021 that lists hundreds of incidents of failures of biosecurity that were all by authorized personnel associated with the afflicted farms. I will repeat that. All of those incidents came from people who were on the property with lawful authority and excuse. I want to quote from that report:

Despite the risk to farms, animals, and the economy posed by disease outbreaks, biosecurity on farms is not comprehensively regulated at the federal level. The CFIA publishes voluntary biosecurity guidelines for some animal farming sectors, developed in cooperation with industry and government. Adherence to these standards is not a legal requirement. Provincial legislation varies, and tends to empower officials to respond to existing biosecurity hazards instead of prescribing rules that farmers must follow to prevent disease outbreaks.

These are some of the items we have to take into account when we are examining the bill.

I want to conclude by saying that, as New Democrats, we absolutely do support animal welfare. I fact, I was personally proud to support petition e-4190, which collected more than 36,000 signatures and is calling for the Liberals to honour their campaign promise of banning the live export of horses for slaughter. That is something the agriculture minister has still not met in her mandate letter, and we committed, through several elections, to updating the health of animal regulations and to making sure we modernize animal welfare legislation.

That being said, I want to very clearly state that I support farmers and I support their rights to be free from trespass. I know, not only from personal experience but also from my five years in this role as agriculture critic, that farmers are good people. They want to treat their animals well during their lives. Based on the witness testimony we heard at the agriculture committee, there is fairly strong support for a measure like Bill C-275.

I do want to note that protesters can legally get close to farms, not on the property, and it is in their interest to call for more accountability. I also want to note that on-farm employees who witness any instances of abuse to livestock could not be silenced by provisions of the bill. In fact, we do want that measure of internal accountability.

I want to say to the member for Foothills that, while I do support the legislation in principle, more work does need to be done at committee. I want to make sure that biosecurity measures would, in fact, apply to everyone and that we would not be intruding on provincial jurisdiction over trespass laws. I look forward to sending the bill to committee for further work.

[Brad Vis, Conservative, Mission—Matsqui—Fraser Canyon, BC]

Mr. Speaker, I thank all of the members of the House of Commons for having another wonderful debate on an important piece of legislation, which is about biosecurity on our farms across Canada. Before I begin, the member for Foothills is not only a gentleman, a scholar and a pretty good hockey player for a dude in his 50s, but he has also always brought forward some really excellent legislation that directly relates to a problem in my great riding of Mission—Matsqui—Fraser Canyon.

A number of years ago, the Binnendyk farm on Harris Road, which is less than 10 minutes from where I live, received national attention when protesters entered the farm illegally. To put it bluntly, this was very hard on the Binnendyk family. Another member, from the Liberal Party, mentioned that it is Mental Health Week. Well, when the illegal protesters came onto the farm, that had a lasting, negative impact on this family and on the way Canadians may perceive the work that farmers do on their behalf.

I know that many people, like me and many other members of the House of Commons, love pork. Pork products are amazing. The pork industry in British Columbia, in the Fraser Valley, where I live, has taken a lot of blows. The Binnendyk farm is one of the last remaining farms in the most productive agricultural area in all of Canada. During these past years, activists, not only on the Binnendyks' farm, but we heard about the Schetter Farm in the Foothills riding as well, have entered farm properties across Canada to denounce the living conditions of animals. In response, farm groups have expressed concerns over these incidents and are calling on the government to find ways to address this problem, because food security matters, a safe food supply matters and this is what we are here to achieve today.

Agricultural “biosecurity” refers to “those practices that prevent or mitigate disease from entering, spreading within, or being released from operations that may contain livestock.” At the farm level, “biosecurity” alludes to, perhaps, a series of managing practices designed to minimize, prevent or control the introduction of infectious diseases onto a farm, spread within a farm production operation and export of the disease agents beyond the farm that may have an adverse effect on the economy, environment and human health. A farm environment can significantly affect the spread or prevention of disease on the farm. As such, facility design, layout and traffic patterns on a farm have significant influence on the effectiveness and the efficiency of a farm-level biosecurity plan. For that reason, farm-level biosecurity plans generally include, among other things, measures to control access to certain areas on a farm.

Members of the House who, like me, have experience spending a lot of time on the farm, and my mom was a farmer, know that there were not, when I was a kid, biosecurity measures like we have today. Because of diseases, which have originated in the Fraser Valley in some cases, farmers have had to adapt to agricultural practices in the 21st century, and rightfully so, because Canadians depend on our farmers to create a safe, secure and reliable source of food that is nutritious and keeps us, as a population, healthy. The federal Health of Animals Act and its regulations, the health of animals regulations, do set out certain provisions, but they do not set out all the biosecurity provisions we need. The bill before us today would address that, in good faith, to keep our farmers safe.

Let us go back to talking about the Binnendyks and the protest that took place. I was texting them when we were having the debate earlier this morning. They said that if I could raise one thing in the House of Commons, they would want it to be that they felt that, although some people were convicted, the organization that allowed Ms. Soranno to undertake her activities should have been accountable too. I will note that there was no remorse by those convicted by our justice system for the actions they took. That is problematic. That is why we need this bill today. In fact, even during the core proceedings or after, the protesters went to the SPCA because they did not like the way that the SPCA made a decision about the Binnendyk Farm, one that did not go according to their narrative.

We need laws that protect our farmers. Importantly, we also need to change perceptions about how food production takes place in Canada. That is why this bill is so important today. I would say to the Binnendyk family that, as their MP, I hear them. We are trying to make sure that what happened to them never happens again on a farm and that there are real penalties for those who willingly enter private property without justification and put up fake videos about what farmers are doing on their agricultural property. We want to put an end to that.

Frankly, I remember I had a conversation after the incident took place on the farm with the Binnendyks' cousin Richard Schutte. He told me, as the MP for Mission—Matsqui—Fraser Canyon, that the Binnendyk farm would probably be the last farm that animal activists would want to pick on, as the Binnendyks have invested all of their livelihood into producing safe food for Canadian families. To my knowledge, they are the last-standing hog farmers on Matsqui Prairie, and they work day and night to provide a safe and secure source of food for my constituents and Canadians around this country.

I am pleased to hear that we have unanimity in the House of Commons to get the bill to committee stage, that members of Parliament are going to work in good faith to improve biosecurity, and that, as a result, our farmers are going to feel a little more protected and a little more heard.

More broadly, in the Fraser Valley, we have been dealing with other sources of biosecurity issues. There are major concerns about avian influenza. I see the work agricultural producers in the poultry sector have to do in order to completely manage their operations with respect to access to their farm and the way animals are transported between farms and processing facilities. We need bills like this one to become law to provide the assurances our producers need to do their job effectively on behalf of all Canadians. One example is that, in 2004, an avian flu event led to a 30% increase in international poultry prices. If we have another serious incident like that, we could see the price of pork, beef or chicken go up 30% or 40%. We need these protections in place. We need to do more to stop infectious disease outbreaks and make sure our producers have the tools required to do their job effectively.

I am thankful for the opportunity to speak to this bill today. When I got elected, I made a promise that I would stand up on this bill. I thank the member for Foothills for bringing it forward. This is a concrete measure that agricultural producers in Mission—Matsqui—Fraser Canyon and across Canada have asked for, and I am pleased to stand in support of it today.

[The Deputy Speaker, Conservative, Chris d'Entremont]

The time provided for the consideration of Private Members' Business has now expired and the order is dropped to the bottom of the order of precedence on the Order Paper.

The House resumed from May 1 consideration of the motion that Bill C-275, An Act to amend the Health of Animals Act (biosecurity on farms) be read the second time and referred to a committee.

[Francesco Sorbara, Liberal, Vaughan—Woodbridge, ON]

Madam Speaker, it is always great to rise to speak in this most honourable of House.

I would like to first offer thanks to the member for Foothills for his work with regard to the agricultural sector in Canada. I know the hon. member is a champion for the agricultural sector in the area he represents. We all come here championing our causes and issues, and I would like to speak to the hon. member's private member's bill this evening.

The government welcomes the opportunity to speak to the importance of supporting Canadian farmers. Now, more than ever, farmers face increasing hardships. These range from sustained supply chain issues to the rising costs of doing business.

Moreover, the effects of climate change and the risk of harmful and deadly animal diseases are only compounding these difficulties. It feels like farmers cannot catch a break. It is crucial that we provide these hard-working Canadians and their families with the tools they need to do their jobs safely so that they can be competitive and ensure the safety of their animals or livestock.

I would like to take a few minutes to speak to importance of the agri-food system in Canada and the actions that our government is taking to support Canadian farmers across the country.

The agriculture and agri-food system is a key pillar of Canada's economy. In 2021, it employed 2.1 million people in Canada, representing one out of every nine jobs. In the same year, Canada exported nearly $82.2 billion in agriculture and food products, making us one of the top 10 exporters of agri-food and seafood in the world, something of which we can be quite proud.

It is safe to say that agriculture touches every Canadian. In fact, the agriculture sector is very broad and encompasses federal, provincial and territorial governments, industry partners and farmers. Each of these groups plays a unique and indispensable role to keep Canadian livestock safe and healthy.

I can proudly say that the Government of Canada takes its role seriously in supporting Canadian farmers and in supporting the Canadian agri-food sector. We have a long record of championing initiatives that protect and grow our agriculture and agri-food sector.

Just recently, budget 2023 announced a number of initiatives to respond to the emerging needs of the Canadian agriculture industry. These included $333 million to establish a dairy innovation and investment fund to increase revenues for dairy farmers; $34 million to support farmers for diversifying away from certain fertilizers; and $13 million to increase the interest-free limit of loans under the advance payments program to provide additional cash flow to farmers in need.

Budget 2023 also announced $57.5 million over five years to establish a vaccine bank for foot and mouth disease so that farmers can maintain market access for their livestock and protect their livelihood in the event of an outbreak.

In addition, the government has a history of working closely with provinces and territories to support economic growth for the agriculture and agri-food sector.

For example, the sustainable Canadian agricultural partnership was launched on April 1. The renewal of this important five-year policy framework will benefit farmers and processors from across all of Canada. The sustainable Canadian agricultural partnership has set aside $3.5 billion, up 25% from the previous 2018 to 2023 agreement, to strengthen the competitiveness, innovation and resiliency of the agriculture sector.

This partnership agreement recognizes what we already know, that farming is a difficult job. That is why the government is also committed to supporting the mental health of Canadians, including farmers and their families. For instance, under the Canadian agricultural partnership, it provided $7 million for two multi-year mental health initiatives to support farmers.

In addition, the government funds the Wellness Together Canada portal. This portal operates 24 hours a day and seven days a week. It provides free, credible information to individuals to help address their mental health and substance use issues. The Wellness Together Canada portal also provides information and self-assessment tools, peer support networks and access to psychologists and other professionals.

This government recognizes that meaningful support to farmers must recognize both economic and psychological hardships.

I understand that Bill C-275 tries to protect farmers by minimizing risks to on-farm biosecurity. Let me be clear that the government takes these risks seriously. Disease outbreaks can have major impacts on animal welfare and food supply, and result in economic losses. We also know that farmers are also focused on biosecurity as they too care about the health and well-being of their animals.

It is important to note that the health of animals and biosecurity measures are a shared responsibility among the federal government, the provinces and territories, industry associations and farmers.

Recognizing the importance of biosecurity in preventing the spread of animal disease, the Government of Canada has championed efforts and has provided funding to strengthen on-farm biosecurity. For instance, federal funds helped support the development of 14 commodity-specific national biosecurity standards. The Canadian Food Inspection Agency, industry, academic institutions, and provinces and territories developed these voluntary national biosecurity standards, protocols and strategies to protect animals from disease.

Additionally, through the federal AgriAssurance program and its predecessors, the government has provided industry associations with funding to develop on-farm assurance programs that include biosecurity protocols. Several of these associations, such as the Dairy Farmers of Canada and the Chicken Farmers of Canada, have on-farm programs that include biosecurity requirements.

In addition, under the Canadian agricultural partnership, federal, provincial and territorial governments have advanced a number of cost-shared investments that support biosecurity. Some recent examples include funding of up to $1.5 million for the poultry biosecurity preparedness initiative in Ontario, and up to $45.3 million to fund efforts that enhance Canada's African swine fever response, including actions to mitigate risks to biosecurity.

These examples all highlight the important work and investment that farmers, industry associations, provinces and territories, and the Government of Canada have all made toward on-farm biosecurity. There is a collective recognition that on-farm biosecurity is an important measure to safeguard animal health and to minimize the risk of animal disease outbreaks in order to protect the livelihood of Canada's agri-food producers. To really help farmers, we should be championing the use of these on-farm biosecurity standards and protocols and encouraging their use.

In conclusion, the government recognizes the hard work, day in and day out, of Canadian farmers, their families and agriculture producers along the complete agricultural continuum, and it is responding to the sector's needs. The government is interested in supporting legislation that builds on the investments that various partners, including farmers themselves, have already made to improve animal health on farms.

We look forward to studying Bill C-275 at committee and discussing ways that it can be amended to recognize and build on the great work farmers, their families, the communities involved and others are doing to support biosecurity measures on farm.

[Luc Desilets, Bloc, Rivière-des-Mille-Îles, QC]

Madam Speaker, we are in the House this evening to study Bill C‑275, which amends the Health of Animals Act. This bill was introduced by the Conservative member for Foothills, in Alberta, and is now in the House at second reading.

Briefly, Bill C‑275 proposes to “make it an offence to enter, without lawful authority or excuse, a place in which animals are kept if doing so could result in [their] exposure...to a disease or toxic substance that is capable of...contaminating them.” So it amends the Health of Animals Act, and it is under that amended act that penalties will be applied.

The Bloc Québécois supports the principle of Bill C‑275, subject to a thorough study in committee. We are in favour of it because it is an important bill and subject. Fundamentally, it is about trespassing. These are criminal acts rooted in extremism. Of course, extremism has never solved anything.

I would like to clarify a few things about this bill before I move on.

First, it is not an indictment of veganism, but an indictment of extremist activism and certain antispeciesists.

Second, this is not about freedom of speech. People absolutely have the right to protest and denounce practices they do not agree with. However, we cannot condone that being done through illegal acts that could also harm both farmers and animals. Obviously, one's personal freedom ends where another's begins.

Third, this bill does not condone animal abuse. We all have a personal and collective responsibility to prevent animal suffering. Once again, that does not mean we are exempt from the law or our duty to go through the designated authorities. In Quebec, the ministry of agriculture, fisheries and food, or MAPAQ, is responsible for this.

Fourth, it is about making people aware that there are biosecurity standards to be respected on farms in order to ensure the safety of animals and livestock.

What is biosafety? MAPAQ defines it as the set of tools, measures and procedures for preventing and addressing the dangers associated with the transmission of pathogens through various pathways for contamination. Mad cow disease, H1N1 and H5N1 influenza, circovirus, scrapie and wasting disease of cervids are all examples of transmitted diseases with serious consequences for the entire agri-food complex, public health and the balance of biodiversity. When humans come into contact with animals or their habitat without taking the appropriate precautions to avoid contamination, the risk of disease increases tenfold. For a breeder, an outbreak can obviously lead to serious financial losses. In the case of a spread outside the farm, the consequences can be devastating.

It is interesting to learn that this bill was drafted partly in response to a specific event that occurred on December 7, 2019, when 13 vegan and antispeciesist activists broke into a hog farm in Saint-Hyacinthe. The farm was named Les Porgreg. They were there to protest the breeding of animals for human consumption. They entered the hog barn, filmed and demonstrated for almost seven hours in front of the pig pens in an attempt to expose the pigs' quality of life.

Several Sûreté du Québec officers had to enter the building to remove them. As a result, some 30 people who should not have been there contaminated the premises.

According to the owners, the incident caused a rotavirus outbreak, which considerably increased the maternal mortality rate of the herd.

Moreover, the criminals were fully aware of what they were doing, and what they were doing was completely illegal.

Events like those in Saint-Hyacinthe are unfortunately not isolated. What is interesting in this particular case is that it was discovered that MAPAQ followed up a year later. That helped move the issue forward and raise public awareness of the situation. The MAPAQ inspector noted that there were too many animals in certain pens at the Les Porgreg pig farm. The pens were soiled with manure, lacked proper ventilation, contained too many flies and so on. The good news is that on March 16, 2020, the farm followed the inspector's recommendations to the letter. Yes, the farm had committed a number of violations, but is this type of stunt allowed, or should it be allowed? The answer is, quite clearly, it absolutely should not.

My brother Alain is a farmer and has been a goat farmer for a number of years. I can say that it is an extremely—

[The Assistant Deputy Speaker, NDP, Carol Hughes]

Order. I want to remind members that the business of the House is continuing. There are a lot of conversations going on on both sides, which is really rude. I would ask members to please take their conversations out.

The hon. member for Rivière-des-Mille-Îles.

[Luc Desilets, Bloc, Rivière-des-Mille-Îles, QC]

Madam Speaker, I was saying that my very dear brother Alain is a farmer and raised goats. I can say that it is an incredibly difficult job that requires working seven days a week, 365 days a year. There is no vacation.

Farmers and ranchers use equipment that costs a fortune. They have to tighten their belts. It is an extremely demanding job.

I believe that ranchers and farmers have been forgotten by today's society. Society depends on them, but does not recognize the true value of everything they do for us.

The Bloc Québécois will obviously vote in favour of this bill.

[Daniel Blaikie, NDP, Elmwood—Transcona, MB]

Madam Speaker, I am pleased to rise in debate today to talk about this bill and its objective of trying to maintain biosecurity on farms. As the member who was just speaking was talking about, we owe a lot to farmers. They do a lot of hard work. Farming can also be challenging financially, particularly in bad years; even in good years, there is a lot of upfront investment that folks need to make in order to be able to have a successful farm. When disease strikes the livestock population, it can be devastating for farmers, financially and otherwise. It stands to reason that there is a real concern about how to protect the biosecurity of farms.

This is a bill we saw in the last Parliament as well. It went to committee. Ultimately, it did not pass. I do not know if it got through the House, but because of an early and untimely election call, it certainly did not get through Parliament. Therefore, here we are debating the same issue again.

It is a legitimate goal to want to protect livestock operations from bacteria and other biological threats that would create problems in the livestock population, and this bill talks about that. Any time one is talking about food, many Canadians are going to have an interest. People want to know where their food comes from and how it is produced.

There are folks who have expressed concern about this bill being more about trying to keep people off farms for the purpose of not talking about how things are produced, but it seems to me that there ought to be a balance that can be struck between these two legitimate concerns. I think, in the last Parliament, in a similar bill, some of that work was being done at committee; there had been some progress made on striking the right balance.

I am optimistic that the right balance can be struck again. This is why it is important for this bill to go to committee, so that work can continue. As I said, this work is not starting from nothing. There are many members who sit around the committee table in this Parliament who were there in the last Parliament, just as my colleague from Cowichan—Malahat—Langford was our critic on that bill in the last Parliament and is now again. I am optimistic that the work can be undertaken in a good way and that they are not starting from scratch, even though it may seem like that on paper, here in this Parliament.

I am pleased to rise to put some of those thoughts on the record and express my support once again for this bill going to committee. There, committee members can hear from folks in civil society, both those with experience running farming operations and others who are concerned about some of the, perhaps, unintended consequences of this legislation. I look forward to the conclusions of the committee after it has had an opportunity to do its work.

[Warren Steinley, Conservative, Regina—Lewvan, SK]

Madam Speaker, I am happy to rise today to support the bill of my friend from Foothills, Bill C-275, an act to amend the Health of Animals Act, relating to biosecurity on farms.

I just listened to my friend from the NDP talk about some of the things this act might do, but I would like to read into the record some of the comments by my friend from Foothills in response to the bill. He said that he wanted to make clear what this bill does not do: It does not limit an individual's right to protest on public property. I just want to make sure that we have an understanding of what this bill is meant to do and what it will not do even if some people have some concerns. It will not prevent whistle-blowers, and it will not prevent people from protesting on public property.

What my friend from Foothills is trying to do is to ensure that animals are secure on private property, on farms. We know that there is a lot going on right now in the agriculture industry, and we have very real concerns about African swine fever and foot-and-mouth disease. There are a lot of diseases that can be contracted, and transferred from farm to farm, that have really devastating effects on the animals on a farm. I just want to make that very clear from the get-go.

This bill is really close to my heart. I was born and raised on a dairy and beef farm in southwest Saskatchewan. That is where my roots are, and that is where I try to get back home to as much as possible. I think some people who, like my NDP friend would say, are concerned about the protesting aspect of animals being on farms, do not really know how to be around animals as much as actual farmers do.

I have to put on the record that people who are raising animals take amazing care of the animals. When I was growing up on the dairy farm, we showed cattle all over North America. We were at the Royal Agricultural Winter Fair and the Madison World Dairy Expo. Those animals were our livelihood on our farm. I remember my dad going out to the barn every night to make sure all the animals were okay, checking to see if a calf was coming and just ensuring the animals were safe and had clean bedding, making sure they were taken care of, making sure there was feed in the alleyways. There were exciting times on the farm.

What I would like to portray this evening, in talking about this bill, is what great care our agriculture producers, our farmers, take with their animals. That is what helps them to provide for their families. As a young boy, I learned this on our farm by watching my dad and my uncle look after—

[The Assistant Deputy Speaker, NDP, Carol Hughes]

The hon. member for Saint-Jean is reporting a problem with the interpretation.

It seems to be working now. The hon. member for Regina—Lewvan may continue his speech.

[Warren Steinley, Conservative, Regina—Lewvan, SK]

Madam Speaker, I was saying that, as a young boy growing up on a farm, I watched the care that my dad and uncle took with the animals. I wanted to portray that and make sure people realize that our producers are second to none in the world in ensuring the security and safety of animals on their farms. That is why this bill is so important.

There have been cases in B.C. and Alberta where people did not have the knowledge of how animals should be treated or of the possibility of spreading diseases from farm to farm by protesting, and I want to portray what kind of impact that has on family farms. It goes from distraught animals and the diseases that could be carried to farms to the mental health of the farmers who look after those animals. That is what it comes down to.

Farmers' livelihoods depend on the safety of these animals. There is nothing more important to them than making sure the animals are secure. When people go to farms to protest, they have to realize the unintended consequence of their actions, and that is transferring diseases from farm to farm. Even if there are no diseases, unknown people on farms can cause animals to stampede, to trample each other and to get really upset. Being distraught can result in a lot of stress on animals. There are examples where they just drop dead; that has happened.

I am glad to hear that my Liberal, NDP and Bloc colleagues will support this bill going forward. In the last Parliament, we did not quite get to the finish line, which is a shame. There was an election call that was probably unnecessary. It was really a $600-million cabinet shuffle. I want to ensure that people realize the intention of Bill C-275. As I said in my earlier comments, peaceful protests on public property would still be allowed. There would also still be opportunities for whistle-blowers to report wrongdoing on farms, but animals on farms need to be taken care of.

Saskatchewan is an agricultural community, and agriculture is still the backbone of the province and drives its economy. I cannot be more clear in saying to people that our producers take amazing care of their animals, whether they are producing beef, dairy, pork or chicken. They have the best of intentions for their animals.

The scary thing is that people, while possibly well intentioned, do not realize how quickly diseases can spread. That is really at the heart of this bill. African swine fever could devastate our hog industry in this country, putting billions of dollars at risk. An outbreak of avian flu is devastating to our producers. People should think of the impact this would have on the mental health of these amazing producers if a flock of birds were wiped out because someone trespassed on private property. This is devastating not only to the community but also to the chicken and poultry community as a whole. It is the same with the African swine fever.

We have seen it in other countries, such as the United States. We have seen these outbreaks and how much they affect these industries. Right now, our agriculture industry is trying to work with a government that continues to tie one hand behind its back, whether it be with carbon tax 1 or carbon tax 2. The industry is trying to make the best of a bad situation.

This bill gives the agriculture producers a leg up, the opportunity to ensure their farms and private properties are safe and secure. That is something we really need to take into consideration moving forward. In fact, we have all-party support on this non-partisan issue. Ensuring that agriculture producers have the opportunity to have security on their own farms is the reason we need to get this bill to the finish line.

I am very excited that my colleague from Foothills brought this forward. It is a strongly worded bill. He did take pains to ensure he talked to all parties to bring forward a bill that everyone could vote in favour of. It is very important to work along non-partisan lines, and we are able to see that from the support this bill has had in the House of Commons. That is how this place should work, in a non-partisan way.

Hopefully, once it is passed in the House of Commons, the Senate will move quickly to pass it as well. It will help our agriculture producers across the country ensure that they, their animals and their families are safe and secure on their own private properties, so they can do the best possible job in raising the amazing world-class livestock we have in this country.

The House resumed consideration of the motion that Bill C-275, An Act to amend the Health of Animals Act (biosecurity on farms), be read the second time and referred to a committee.

[Damien Kurek, Conservative, Battle River—Crowfoot, AB]

Madam Speaker, as always, it is an honour to enter into debate tonight. I certainly appreciate the speech given by my friend and colleague the member for Regina—Lewvan. It touched upon a lot of what I believe are the important subjects and contents related to Bill C-275.

If I could, I would like to start with a quote. This quote is from somebody I know, and a number of people in this place know this individual as well. I happen to know him really well, as he is my father, and this is a quote that he shares with me on a fairly regular basis. It is related to farming, which is very close to my family's heart. He says, “We owe our entire existence to a few inches of topsoil and some timely rains.”

The reason I bring that up in the context of this debate is that farming is a unique occupation. It is something to which I subject myself, year after year, generation after generation, and I am proud to be the fifth generation that is farming in the dust in Alberta's special areas. We subject ourselves to so many factors that are outside of our control, such as the weather, and that has become a significant topic of conversation, especially in light of some of the wildfires that have impacted many communities across the country.

We are subject to market conditions. On a small farm or a large farm, in the context of the larger global situation, a farmer is a price-taker. We do not have any control over how much we sell our products for. We also do not have control over how much the products cost, in inputs, to put in the ground.

When it comes to the larger context, the reason I wanted to start with that quote is that it is important for people in this place to understand how there are so few factors within a government's or any individual's control when it comes to a farm operation.

I know that, when it comes to health and the importance of the ethics of animal management, there has been some debate about where agriculture and Canada's ag industry fit into that, but let me make something very clear: We can be proud of our ag industry. We can be proud of the record of our farmers, our ranchers, our chicken farmers, our turkey farmers and our pig farmers. Canada has an incredible reputation, one that we can and should be proud of, because we have demonstrated not only our ability to produce food to feed the world, but also how we can do so in a manner that is good for the environment and done ethically. It is truly the gold standard on the planet. That is something we should all be very proud of in this place.

One of those factors within our control is something that this bill touches on. I appreciate the shadow minister of agriculture from the Conservative side, somebody who knows a lot about agriculture, understands the dynamics of what I am talking about and cares about our farmers, ranchers and producers from across the country. Whether they are on potato farms on P.E.I., dairies on Vancouver Island or anywhere in between, there is a care that the shadow minister and Conservatives have for those in this sector.

Specifically, one of the areas within our control has to do with what is known as biosecurity. Many people do not realise that, when there is a report on television of activists showing up at a turkey farm, there is far more than that 30-second clip on the news. What may have happened, and what this may have led up to, is that those activists, probably inadvertently, although one can never be quite sure, may have brought in a disease that could impact an entire flock. They could have gone to a ranch and brought in a disease that could have an impact on an entire herd.

There is a number of diseases that are widespread across the world right now. African swine fever is one of them, and avian flu is another, and when I talk to any producer of animals that could be affected by those things, there is an amount of stress when it comes to managing those things, factors that are largely out of the control of a producer.

However, we have a chance here with Bill C-275 to make sure that, within the bit within our control, we can manage and navigate it, so there is not an incident where a disease is brought into a producer's operation that could have devastating effects on an entire industry, let alone on what is usually a farmer's small business.

I talked about the pride that we can have in our national ag industry. I can tell members of the pride so many producers across our country have, like those who raise turkeys. One of my constituents is proud of the turkeys he raises. There are broilers, chickens, that they are incredible proud of, and dairies, with the milk they produce.

I am proud to be from an area that I affectionately refer to as “cowboy country”. There are many areas of east central Alberta where the only thing someone can do on the land is ranch. We have some incredible ranchers who showcase the best of that industry. An activist, well-intentioned or not, showing up to an operation could have a devastating effect, which could result in an entire herd or flock having to be culled.

This bill simply takes heed from some of the work that provinces have done related to biosecurity and adds some penalties and additional teeth to ensure that it is not stopping activism and it is not stopping whistle-blowers. That is not what this is about, but it ensures that there are appropriate safeguards in place so we do not have the devastating consequences of activism gone wrong.

There are some activists across the way. I know our Minister of Environment is probably one of the only members of the House who has been to prison, and he went because he was an illegal activist. I know the Liberals understand a bit about what activism is about.

We are talking about making sure that the livelihood and welfare of farmers, and the welfare of the animals, are protected. This is a very straightforward way to do that.

Something else this bill would do that I think is so very important is that it talks about mental health. Mental health is a significant issue across our nation. In the industry we are talking about, agriculture, as I mentioned, there is so much that those in the ag industry deal with that is so out of their control.

The bill proposes a small adjustment to the Farm Credit Canada Act to include mental health as part of its mandate. What is significant about this is Farm Credit Canada is a lending institution, a Crown corporation lending institution. It would have, if the bill passes, the ability to include mental health resources as part of its core mandate.

I want to give kudos to Farm Credit. This is already part of what it does. If someone googles “farming mental health”, Farm Credit Canada is one of the sites that comes up. It has some good resources and a checklist.

Farming can be incredibly stressful. It might be around calving time when, for a rancher, the hours of sleep are short, or when seeding a harvest for a farmer, or any of the other times of the year that can have undue stress. They all have a significant impact on a farmer. To be sure, we need to do everything we can to promote mental health in an industry that is so vitally important for our country. Again, it cannot be understated how important this sector is.

Parliament needs to recognize there needs to be teeth when it comes to ensuring that we do not put the livelihood of a herd or a flock at risk. We need to ensure that there are protections for those farmers who work diligently each and every day, while striking that right balance to ensure that it does not stifle freedom of speech or anything like that. Further, we have to acknowledge the necessity of mental health as part of the conversation.

I would point to a number of great examples, such as Facebook pages by farmers, ranchers and others involved in the ag industry who have taken the cause upon themselves to ensure they are promoting mental health in the sector. It is incredible work, which I would love to be able to talk more about.

This is a piece of legislation coming before the House that strikes the right balance and protects what is one of the most significant industries, certainly in my constituency, and truly for any person in this country who eats. It is one of the most significant industries we have. We need to be taking those steps to ensure that we can provide that protection when so many factors are out of our control. This is a simple step that can be taken to not only promote mental health, but also ensure biosecurity on farms. It is worthy of everyone's support.

[Mel Arnold, Conservative, North Okanagan—Shuswap, BC]

Madam Speaker, it truly is an honour to once again rise today as the representative of the people of North Okanagan—Shuswap to speak to Bill C-275, put forward by my hon. colleague from Foothills.

Bill C-275 would amend the Health of Animals Act to “make it an offence to enter, without lawful authority or excuse, a place in which animals are kept if doing so could result in the exposure of the animals to a disease or toxic substance that is capable of affecting or contaminating them.” This is an important bill for farmers.

I come from a community in North Okanagan—Shuswap where we grow just about anything that can be grown in Canada. We also have some incredible ranchers, chicken farmers, hog farmers and dairy farmers who truly care about their animals. I have toured their farms and seen the care they put into making sure their animals are healthy, safe and secure. However, I have also heard about farmers finding foreign objects in their grain auger, such as a bolt that should have been nowhere near the grain auger system and could have caused damage to the auger, basically crippling the ability to feed the chickens that were on the farm. That is just one example of what farmers believe to be trespassing and attacks on their farms.

Earlier this year, I had the honour of hosting the shadow minister for agriculture in my riding. We did a round table with farmers and members of the agriculture sector. One of the things we heard from those farmers, who were quite open, is something that had not been evident before: their concern for their mental health and their family's mental health.

There are so many stresses placed on our farmers these days. Many of them are carrying mortgages or farm loans to carry on their operations. Those stresses, along with being responsible for supporting their family, meeting deadlines and paying bills, just add to the mental health stress put on these farmers. Also, the added stress of not knowing who might come onto their farms and what they might be doing in the dark of night or at any time not only affects them and their families, but also affects their livelihoods and the animals they care so much about. This added stress was one of the pieces they raised with us about their mental health situation, because they are under so much stress.

These farmers really pay attention to their animals. They know when the animals are stressed, they know when the animals are comfortable and they know when things are not right. It is interesting how birds can be very sensitive to that, and I have experienced it while touring a chicken farm. When I entered the barn, the farmer actually instructed me to move slowly and cautiously so as not to alarm the birds, because it would throw them off their laying cycle and so on.

This reminded me that, a number of years ago, my sister and brother-in-law started an ostrich farm. They were raising ostriches and set up a barn for the hatchlings to grow in. My brother-in-law was doing most of the interaction, with feeding, checking up on the birds and so on. He could walk into that barn at any time dressed any way he chose and the birds were calm and relaxed and would carry on as if nothing was going on. However, if my sister entered that barn, it did not matter whether she put on his clothing, his coveralls or his hat, doing everything to disguise herself as him. There was something that those birds knew instantly, and it would send them basically into a state of stress and they would be running around. Ostriches are very susceptible to leg problems, such as knee joint problems, in their very young stages, so they had to be careful about who went into the barn and when.

The same thing can happen in many situations. We know that dairy farmers for years have played music on the radio. It has a calming effect on the animals in the barn. Having strangers come onto a farm for nefarious reasons or to ignore the biosecurity measures that have been put in place is something that needs to be addressed in legislation and law.

There is so much at stake with farmers across this country feeding not just Canadians but people around the world with the food they produce: the grain, the beef and the chicken products. So many different products feed not just Canadians but people around the world. We need to be certain that those products and that supply chain are stable. I believe this bill would go a long way toward making sure there is no disruption in that process.

I mentioned biosecurity. When we visit a dairy farm or a chicken farm, we are often expected to change our footwear or to walk through a type of wet bath for our footwear so that any toxins or biohazards on the footwear are cleaned off by the product in there. People going in without authorization would not be doing that. They could put that entire farm and neighbouring farms at risk if they are not there for the right reasons with the right authorizations.

As I mentioned, we have heard of farmers who have found potential damage to their equipment. We have had, in my hometown of Salmon Arm, protesters trying to protest trucks coming into a hog abattoir and blocking the processing of food for Canadians. I do not believe this bill would cover that aspect, but it sends the message that our food production is so important here in Canada that we need to take every step we can to make sure we secure it and keep it safe. I do not think that people who have not been exposed to farm life can understand that.

I think I mentioned that I grew up on a dairy farm. I spent my formative years there learning about taking care of animals. They had to be fed every day. They had to have water every day. They had to have a place of shelter every day. It was not something I could do part time and then just leave until I felt like coming back again. There was responsibility with that, and that responsibility is something that farm life has instilled in so many young people across our country today. However, it is not often understood by people who have not been exposed to farm life.

I hope that many people will listen to the speeches that have gone on about this bill, Bill C-275, which is from my colleague from Foothills. What is such an important piece for people to understand is that farmers, almost 100% of them, want to take care of their livestock. There are the odd bad apples out there and they get found out, but the vast majority of farmers care so much about their livestock that they would put their own health and their own mental health at risk to make sure those animals are fed, to make sure they get water and to make sure they are safe from any threat. This bill would go a long way toward reducing at least one threat to the animals and to the farmers' livelihoods and would improve their mental health, as they would not have to worry quite so much about the possibility of someone coming onto their farm without authorization.

I want to thank my fellow colleague, the member for Foothills, for putting this bill forward. It is an excellent bill and I look forward to supporting it.

[Alex Ruff, Conservative, Bruce—Grey—Owen Sound, ON]

Madam Speaker, I want to thank the member for Foothills for bringing this bill forward again. He brought it forward in a previous Parliament, and I believe I had the chance to jointly second it then. Unfortunately, I missed the opportunity to speak to it, so I appreciate the opportunity to get a short intervention in to highlight the importance of this bill.

Some of the previous speakers have already highlighted one of the key aspects of this bill: Not only is it about biosecurity and ensuring our food supply and food chains are protected, but it is about education. It is about letting Canadians know that in Canada, we have some of the best farmers and people in the food industry and agricultural sector, who really take care of their animals and the food they are raising. Canadians do not have anything to be worried about. This bill does a great job of providing that security, reassurance and education.

I want to share a bit of my own history, although I am maybe not as experienced as some of the members here in the House. I grew up on a farm. I raised 700 ducks, a couple of hundred chickens, a couple of hundred turkeys and 50 geese every year in the summers. It was free range, pretty loosey-goosey. It was not what one would call a mass production facility by any stretch. We handled everything, raising them from day-olds right through to butchering time. The good thing about being the eldest of five boys is I did all the chores to grow them, but come butchering time, I let my brothers do the butchering and the plucking.

I grew up there, and after high school I joined the military. I was on the road and not at the local farms near as much as I was when growing up and working. I was shocked when I got home and made the transition into politics and went out to visit to the farmers in my area. I am privileged to represent the riding with the most beef production per capita in eastern Canada. We have dairy farmers and have turkeys and chickens. We have everything.

When I have gone to visit beef farmers, and all farmers, I have been impressed with how seriously they take their operations, how seriously they take the health of their animals and how clean everything is. I would argue that most of the barns I have been in are cleaner than my nine-year-old daughter's bedroom. It is impressive to see the care they take. I think that is the essential message: It is not only about the health of the animals, but about how seriously our farmers take this.

There has been mention of mental health. Our farmers are in a very volatile industry. They are subject to everything from climate change to market volatility. They are stressed. Their day-to-day lives are impacted by a number of factors, and the last thing they need, and I am not trying to be provocative, is uneducated people interfering with their livelihood and their ability to put food on the table for all Canadians.

We have some great examples historically. The first question I had the privilege of asking in the House of Commons was tied to mad cow disease, BSE. I was wondering why the government had failed to react quickly enough in getting our status changed at the World Health Organization. It ended up costing Canadians in our ag industry, our beef farmers in particular, millions of dollars. My point is that lessons have been learned the hard way in this country about what happens when we have any type of illness.

I want to again thank the member for Foothills for bringing this bill forward. It is a great bill that would help keep our food industry protected. It is a good thing to see.

[The Assistant Deputy Speaker, NDP, Carol Hughes]

I will allow the hon. member for Foothills five minutes for his right of reply.

[John Barlow, Conservative, Foothills, AB]

Madam Speaker, I want to thank all of my colleagues in this House who have spoken in support of my private member's bill, which would amend the Health of Animals Act to protect biosecurity on farms.

Many of the comments that have been raised in the speeches tonight, and I have heard it online, are that there have not been occasions where diseases have been spread as a result of protesters. That just simply is not case. There was an outbreak of rotavirus in Quebec when protesters were found at a hog operations in Saint-Hyacinthe, Quebec. Mink farms in Ontario had an outbreak of canine distemper when protesters were on the farms.

This is is happening, and we cannot allow this type of activity to continue if we want to protect the biosecurity not only on farms but of our food security across Canada and around the world.

This came about from an instance that happened in my riding. I have spoken about this in the House previously. I received a call from farmers near Fort Macleod, who woke up one morning, checked on their free-range turkey farm and found 40 protesters in the barn trying to take their animals. The stress this put the Tschetter family under is incredible, and it still goes on today.

We have heard that from farmers across Canada, who have had instances where protesters have been on their farms. They ask, “Why me?” They ask what they did to attract this sort of activity. I received many calls from farmers across Canada asking if this was open season on farmers and whether they were not even safe on their own property. There are the mental health impacts on farmers but also the financial risk to the agriculture industry and consumers across the country.

We are seeing this take place right now across Canada, and certainly in the Fraser Valley and across the Prairies with the outbreak of avian flu. My colleagues have talked about the mental health impact this has on farmers when they are worried about protesters, but we are also dealing with euthanizing thousands and thousands of animals.

B.C. chicken farmers are having to euthanize complete barns of their animals. This is happening across western Canada and some parts of central Canada and eastern Canada. I cannot overstate the impact this has on these farm families, who do everything they possibly can to take care of these animals and who follow very strict biosecurity protocols to protect their operations.

One cannot imagine how difficult it is to ask CFIA to come in when there is a positive test of avian flu and a farmer is told he has to put down all of his animals he worked so hard to raise from chicks to adulthood.

It would be similar if we had an outbreak of African swine fever. The pork industry said that an outbreak of African swine fever would be a $48-billion impact on that industry. It would wipe out the hog industry in Canada. We have seen it in China, which had to euthanize more than a million animals as a result of African swine fever.

We have very strict biosecurity protocols in place for these very reasons. Unfortunately, these protesters who come on to private property in many cases just do not understand the consequences of them going from farm to farm, operation to operation, and possibly spreading those viruses and animal-borne diseases from one farm to the next. The consequences of that activity could be disastrous, on a scale we have never seen before in Canada.

I certainly do not want to see another outbreak of something similar to BSE, be it African swine fever or foot and mouth disease. We are already seeing the implications of avian flu.

The other comment that has been made is that this is the ag-gag bill. That simply is not the case, and I cannot stress this enough. This would not stop protesters from protesting on public land outside of the farm, and it certainly would not stop whistle-blowers or employees on a farm from reporting issues they see that are not up to standard. In fact, those employees and the farm families themselves have a moral and legal obligation to report any poor activity that does not meet our standards.

I want to thank all of my colleagues in this House for supporting this legislation, supporting farm families and supporting our agriculture industry. I look forward to discussing this further at committee.

[The Assistant Deputy Speaker, NDP, Carol Hughes]

The question is on the motion.

If a member of a recognized party present in the House wishes that the motion be carried or carried on division or wishes to request a recorded division, I would invite them to rise and indicate it to the Chair.

[John Barlow, Conservative, Foothills, AB]

Madam Speaker, I request a recorded division.

[The Assistant Deputy Speaker, NDP, Carol Hughes]

Pursuant to order made on Thursday, June 23, 2022, the division stands deferred until Wednesday, June 21, at the expiry of the time provided for Oral Questions.